Obey New Colossus
Search Text Case Sensitive Exact Words Include Comments
List of Bookmarks
From WREG:
… He announced Monday he will co-sponsor the Statue of Liberty Values (SOLVE) Act …
Follow @steve_sailer
The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
Commenters to ignore (one per line)
Commenters to follow (one per line)
Trim Comments?
Comments are closed.
Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSSPastClassics
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
In 2014 (((Cohen))) floated the idea (hey!) of some kind of moat to increase security around the White House.
As I discuss in this post (http://necpluribusimpar.net/meanwhile-in-yemen/), all these brave people, who care oh so much about human rights (Chuck Schumer even teared up during his press conference, it was beautiful to see, especially since he’d never shown signs of having a conscience before), weren’t so shocked when Obama was murdering innocent people in Yemen and don’t seem to care that much either that Trump is doing the same thing… Could it be that it’s because killing Yemeni in Yemen doesn’t prevent the ruling class from hiring gardeners for cheap? I guess we’ll never know…
This may be getting a little off into the historical and intellectual weeds somewhere, but all of the New Colossus craziness reminds me how repeatedly and heavily idolatry was proscribed against for the Hebrews in the Bible. Obviously graven images are prohibited in the Ten Commandments, and the issue of the Chosen People having to be reminded of this proscription, and failing it, comes up again and again and again (in Exodus, Leviticus, 1 and 2 Kings, Jeremiah, etc.).
Does this speak to some particular cultural susceptibility to worshipping graven images of this earth that represent some thing? Is the New Colossus really a New Moloch, or a New Golden Calf?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aniconism_in_Judaism
What percentage of modern Catholics would you say have a statue of the Virgin Mary on their dash?Replies: @Thomas, @snorlax, @TheJester
Of course Japan, Korea and Taiwan have no immigration cultists worshiping the golden calf of immigration, while being as wealthy and spoiled as European derived nations. They know something white people do not.Replies: @anon
That's an interesting point. There are a lot of rules in the bible that people follow (or not) just because God said so. But if you dig enough, you can often find a usefulness to the rules. In this case, perhaps blindly following graven images leads people to do things that are batshit crazy.
Rep. Cohen has a fine-tuned fear that if we don’t let people move here at will, they will get mad and kill us. Sounds like the kind of people we don’t need more of (both Cohen and the newcomers).
I can't really see how anyone finds this credible. "It's the right thing to do to let them in, otherwise, they're relatives who are already here will get made and kill us." Talk about argumentum ad baculum ("appeal to the club," i.e., a threat).
The Senate Judiciary committee is supposed to vote on Jeff Sessions' appointment as Attorney General tomorrow and, regardless of that, I really hope Trump's Administration has got some decent legal talent up and working already. The legal knives from not only Soros-funded nonprofit outfits like the ACLU, but now state attorneys general and corporate money are coming in (the Washington State attorney general, with support from Amazon and Expedia, just announced a lawsuit to block Trump's executive order). That's some heavy weight coming down for an administration that's barely a week old and doesn't have everything staffed up. Trump is seriously going to lose a lot of momentum and credibility if he gets tied down like Gulliver by a bunch of lawsuits, stays, and restraining orders.Replies: @27 year old, @ben tillman, @bomag, @JerseyGuy, @Anonymous
"If we don't let them in they'll kill us."
Bending over and biting the pillow worked out real well for the French, Swedes, Germans, etc.Replies: @Dr. X, @Carbon blob, @ben tillman
Sunni Islam is cousin to Judaism
Shia Islam not so much.
https://twitter.com/UnHolyFamily/status/824394806646415362/photo/1
Nothing to (((notice))) here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965#Legislative_history
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Cohen
No, just racial tests.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Black_Caucus#Non-Black_membership
“Statue of Liberty values”?
WT bleeding F?
I know what:
Somewhere near the ankle there is a plug.
Pull it out.
And have your ichor-wading hip-boots on.
Chucky Schumer made the same argument today: http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/01/30/schumer-trumps-order-will-make-us-less-safe-will-encourage-lone-wolves-america/
I can’t really see how anyone finds this credible. “It’s the right thing to do to let them in, otherwise, they’re relatives who are already here will get made and kill us.” Talk about argumentum ad baculum (“appeal to the club,” i.e., a threat).
The Senate Judiciary committee is supposed to vote on Jeff Sessions’ appointment as Attorney General tomorrow and, regardless of that, I really hope Trump’s Administration has got some decent legal talent up and working already. The legal knives from not only Soros-funded nonprofit outfits like the ACLU, but now state attorneys general and corporate money are coming in (the Washington State attorney general, with support from Amazon and Expedia, just announced a lawsuit to block Trump’s executive order). That’s some heavy weight coming down for an administration that’s barely a week old and doesn’t have everything staffed up. Trump is seriously going to lose a lot of momentum and credibility if he gets tied down like Gulliver by a bunch of lawsuits, stays, and restraining orders.
If America were founded by Jews and if Jews had allowed only Jewish immigration for most of American history, would Jews then decide to go for mass immigration from goy nations, indeed to the point where goyim become the new majority?
If Jews had a chance of becoming the new majority of Americans through high Jewish birthrates, would they push for more immigration?
I think Jews push for more immigration because they have NO CHANCE of ever becoming the majority.
But why promote more immigration when nearly all immigrants are gentiles?
Because they are non-white gentiles, and that means their increasing presence will lead to fracturing of the gentile population, making it difficult for a unified gentile power to challenge Jewish elite power.
These new immigrants are not Jewish and will never be Jewish — and may even feel anti-Jewish, BUT they are the un-whites, even anti-whites. Thus, they are useful to the ruling globalist elites in undermining the possibility of unified gentile nationalism.
It does more than that: It delivers a death blow by diluting the European genome.
I can't really see how anyone finds this credible. "It's the right thing to do to let them in, otherwise, they're relatives who are already here will get made and kill us." Talk about argumentum ad baculum ("appeal to the club," i.e., a threat).
The Senate Judiciary committee is supposed to vote on Jeff Sessions' appointment as Attorney General tomorrow and, regardless of that, I really hope Trump's Administration has got some decent legal talent up and working already. The legal knives from not only Soros-funded nonprofit outfits like the ACLU, but now state attorneys general and corporate money are coming in (the Washington State attorney general, with support from Amazon and Expedia, just announced a lawsuit to block Trump's executive order). That's some heavy weight coming down for an administration that's barely a week old and doesn't have everything staffed up. Trump is seriously going to lose a lot of momentum and credibility if he gets tied down like Gulliver by a bunch of lawsuits, stays, and restraining orders.Replies: @27 year old, @ben tillman, @bomag, @JerseyGuy, @Anonymous
Trump can simply ignore the legal challenges. And apparently, ICE is already doing that. Not terribly concerned.
So the Statue of Liberty starts to become an actual legal/Constitutional principle. What other landmarks will be codified? The Liberty Bell? The Old North Church? Mt. Rushmore?
I’ll put my money on whatever Rosa Parks memorial there is out there.
If restrictionists were smart, they’d immediately introduce a bill blocking immigration from all countries that refuse to accept American immigrants on equal terms to our own policies, then publicly denounce all opponents with name calling. Piggyback on their idiocy. That bill would effectively end immigration. Call it the George Washington Patriot bill or something else totally asinine…whatever works.
Problem solved.
“Obviously graven images are prohibited in the Ten Commandments”
What percentage of modern Catholics would you say have a statue of the Virgin Mary on their dash?
But there's a credible case that the commandment was relaxed in the New Testament. (From "don't create" to "don't worship").
On the order of the Emperor, the Byzantine or Eastern Orthodox Church temporarily banned the veneration of images in the 8th Century on the model of Islam. The common explanation is that the Byzantine Empire was taken back by recent Muslim military successes that rolled up large tracts of the Empire. The Emperor wanted to cover his odds by making sure the latter was not God's punishment for blasphemy.
The ban didn't last. The Christain worshippers loved them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Iconoclasm
He should really just call it the SCHMALTZ Act, but nobody could figure out all the letters.
And boy, does he have a cuck face, an easy 10 out of 10 on the cuck scale. How on earth does this guy get elected in Memphis?
https://www.facebook.com/events/265729137178766/
Jeb! is giving a talk at my school. If there is a Q & A, what should I ask him? Can you guys think of any “gotcha” questions on immigration? Should I go for the Richwine angle, or would that be too much?
[After inevitable mealy mouthed non-answer: "So the number is infinite?"]• Why would you expect "refugees" to be loyal to their new country when they weren't loyal to their old country?• As an owner of a disproportionate share of the nation's personal wealth, would ¡Jeb! personally host a disproportionate, representative share of the illegal immigrants he wants to amnesty? "Representative" = young, male, no reliable documents.
Jeb: Please, call me Jeb!, no need for formality here.
Lord Jeff: Jeb!, you’ve characterized undocumented immigration as quote “An act of love.” Shouldn’t such brazen foreign trespassing be called “An act of FUCK?” Because regular Americans are getting fucked.
(Amid boos, some “deplorable” clapping.)
Jeb: Please don’t clap.
) Many MENA people immigrate here and build mosques. Scant few from here immigrate to MENA and build churches. What should we do about this imbalance?
) Immigration restriction has been shown to be a winning strategy in recent political elections, but almost no professional politician has heeded the people's wishes and campaigned on addressing this need. Can you give us any insight as to why the political class has no interest in helping Americans who are desperate for some relief from the overwhelming immigration foisted upon them by the professional political class?
) The evidence is accumulating that the leadership class in this country likes immigrants better than the people already here for many generations. Can you reflect for a few moments on why leaders in this country have come to hate their fellow citizens so much?
That would be… problematic. For all the power of the Presidency, he isn’t actually an autocrat. An out and out Jacksonian “let them enforce it” attitude towards the federal courts could very easily cause other Republicans, Congress, and parts of the federal bureaucracy to run for cover. Even if he wanted to, he probably couldn’t get away with that.
The law states that the president has plenary power as to who is admitted into the USA. The courts can go pound sand because they lack standing to get involved.
The acting Attorney General in charge of the Justice Department (appointed by Obama, of course) has ordered US attorneys not to defend Trump's executive orders. Jeff Sessions' appointment is still pending (the Senate Judiciary Committee will come back to it tomorrow). The Democrats would continue to try to put it off any way they can (they were trying to get Senators to hold up any Trump appointments until they have a chance to get testimony from them on the so-called "Muslim ban").
And this is just one official at the top of a cabinet department. Multiply it literally by a few hundred thousand throughout the length and breadth of the federal government. Trump's possible strategy to overwhelm his opponents with activity in the first week has seemed like a great idea, for a week. But if it's being executed 1) without his own people in places they need to be; 2) with an entire edifice of political enemies in all of the departments and offices he needs to do anything; and 3) in such a way that it scares off Republicans, in Congress and elsewhere, with whom he has, at best, a tenuous and conditional level of support, he's going to find himself lacking the ability to get much done very quickly.
Shock and awe, bucking the system, and defying everyone's expectations worked in the election, I'll grant. But the federal government is big, unwieldy beast that isn't easy to run under the best of circumstances.Replies: @bomag
The President and Congress are actually bound by oath to protect and defend the constitution. If they believe the federal courts are decreeing unconstitutionally, they not only can ignore them, they *should* be ignoring them. This idea that everyone else with a constitutional duty is supposed to jump back when some federal judge goes off on his\her moral preening tantrum is ridiculous--and actually bad for real constitutional governance. It appeals to lawyers--all questions decided by us--but isn't healthy for an actual republic of free self-governing citizens.
(BTW, the havoc that this sort of judicial super-legislative law making does to the idea of a republic is a good reason for treating it with the utmost contempt and applying the most severe sanction against its perpetrators. It ought to be a capital crime.)
~~
Not a lawyer, much less an immigration lawyer--happy to hear the input of one--but my ordinary citizen's read of immigration law gives the President pretty wide latitude to decrease immigration.
US immigration law seems to have a bunch--far too many--categories for various visas including immigration visas, plus various numbers and quotas. I.e. it puts specific legal limits on immigration. It would be illegal for a President--like Obama did--to just try and make up new category. However, there is nothing in immigration law that says the President as chief administrator of the immigration (and state department) bureaucracy *must* issue every last little visa that could be issued. Nor that he can't order his subordinates to issue visas to people in these countries and not in these other countries--or be very circumspect in these countries compared to these other countries. (In fact, US presidents have always done this.) If Trump decides say we don't actually have a shortage of young women in the US and decides to order the bureaucracy to issue *no* nanny visas--we apparently have such a category!--that's perfectly legal. Likewise if Trump decides to have his bureaucracy to refuse to issue any visas to Saudi Arabians or Muslims or communists or Jews or Christians or whites or blacks or Chinese or ... *whomever*, that's perfectly legal.
As I see it there is not only no moral right for any foreign to come to the United States, but there is no particular legal right under US law, even if you think you qualify and have done your paperwork. That's what being a foreigner means. (When I travel i'm under no illusion that I have any *right* to be in someone else's country--just visiting it. Much less would I think I have the right to come and park my ass there.)Replies: @bomag
What percentage of modern Catholics would you say have a statue of the Virgin Mary on their dash?Replies: @Thomas, @snorlax, @TheJester
Catholics aren’t Jews. You let Catholics make graven images, you get the Pieta. You let Jews do the same, you get golden calfs, golems, etc.
Having been banned from sculpting by divine fiat for millennia, ((( YEHT ))) may have lost the genetic ability to even sculpt any more. This person sees no evidence that ((( YEHT ))) could do it, even if ((( YEHT ))) wanted to.
Alas, there seems no way to even run the experiment.
I get the impression it was (and is) definitely the worship of graven images that's a problem, rather than the images themselves. More problematic is surely praying to saints - I know the idea is that they intercede with God on our behalf, but I bet Jews don't pray to Moses, Samuel or Abraham, no matter how well they may have served the Lord.
Obama did it in ’11 and none of these people went soggy-tampon on us then. As with Big Daddy O’s regular and sustained killing of brown people far, far away, you never heard a parakeet-cheep’s worth of protest from any Negro, mediocre or otherwise. And all our available Cohens were otherwise occupied and far too busy greeting our incoming Farouks with hot soup and vote-Tammany bumper stickers to propose any hey-looka-me photo-op amendments or other such cynical flagwaving charades.
This is an “argument” that I can’t understand anyone honestly believing.
“If we don’t let them in they’ll kill us.”
Bending over and biting the pillow worked out real well for the French, Swedes, Germans, etc.
Interesting how no one ever says this about Mexican migrants or Asian H1B workers.
Besides cheap labor addicted corporations there is an immigration cult in the US, Canada, Europe and Australia. And there are white people immigration cultists. We expect the usual Hispanic, Asian ethnic pressure groups to always be agitating for open borders policies for their people, but its the sappy, sentimental, dumbass whites who are in the drivers seat.
Of course Japan, Korea and Taiwan have no immigration cultists worshiping the golden calf of immigration, while being as wealthy and spoiled as European derived nations. They know something white people do not.
Where do they get the “E” from?
And boy, does he have a cuck face, an easy 10 out of 10 on the cuck scale. How on earth does this guy get elected in Memphis?Replies: @Cortes
The comment below the link really ought to be read aloud in the kind of English accent characteristic of the louche upper class AC/DC type of Gielgud or dear, dear Larry:
https://consortiumnews.com/2017/01/28/deep-state-vs-donald-trump/
I’ll see your Schmaltz and raise you this Maudlin “method in his madness ” defence of President Trump.
Enjoy!
Simple rule for immigrants:
Anyone who qualifies for “affirmative action” should not be allowed entry…….
I’m getting really tired of the proponents of mass immigration always bringing up the Statue of Liberty, when all of my ancestors came over here from England about 250 years before that thing was even put up. When do the descendants of the original settlers and colonists get some respect?
Not to mention that four years prior to its dedication a Congress comprised heavily of Union Army veterans (you know, those guys who fought to free the slaves) was passed overwhelmingly by the House (202-37) and the Senate (32-15).Replies: @Wilkey
Econ Talk has George Borjas on this week’s podcast.
Serious question: have the Democrats always been this traitorous? I grew up in the 90’s and history class seemed to always leave out the time period from the 60’s onward.
Up until about three months ago, the need to keep the last working class whites on-side kept a lid on the full-on treason of the Party. But Hillary ditched 'em.
Now, as you observe, there are no more restraints.Replies: @Opinionator
Bill Clinton, Harry Reid, and Barbara Jordan (a black lesbian liberal Democrat) are all on record opposing policies like illegal immigration, birthright citizenship, and even favoring massive outright reductions in legal immigration - about 20 years ago. I even read an article today about all the Democrats (Jerry Brown, George McGovern, etc.) who back in the 1970s were opposed to admitting Vietnamese refugees (because those people were fleeing communism).
The allegation is repeatedly made that the Republican Party has spent the last two decades moving far, far to the right. The reality is that it is the Democrats who have moved way out to the left, especially on immigration. Hillary Clinton actually praise Angela Merkel for her disastrous refugee admissions program, which plunged Southeast Europe into chaos and admitted into Germany in a single year, on a per capit basis, the equivalent of admitting 3-4 million refugees into America.
Trump should prank the press by finding an old Obama Executive Order and reissuing it verbatim as a new EO, then let the press go nuts for a day or two. It would be especially fun if a protest march was organized against it. Condemnations of it would probably pop up for years to come in anti-Trump editorials.
He could get the ball rolling by tweeting something obnoxious about the EO.
Can we get some serious commentary about the biggest immigration news in the past 30 years please?
Don’t forget the “intersectional” constitutional principles of people of color and gay-transgenders to be found in the Stonewall Inn National Monument.
Rep. Cohen looks like Al Franken’s bald cousin. How did this guy get elected in a district that’s 60% Black?
Family supports family.
Sunni Islam is cousin to Judaism
Shia Islam not so much.
“For all the power of the Presidency, he isn’t actually an autocrat. An out and out Jacksonian “let them enforce it” attitude towards the federal courts could very easily cause other Republicans, Congress, and parts of the federal bureaucracy to run for cover. Even if he wanted to, he probably couldn’t get away with that.”
The law states that the president has plenary power as to who is admitted into the USA. The courts can go pound sand because they lack standing to get involved.
Here’s an example of the sort of problems the Administration has: http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/30/politics/donald-trump-immigration-order-department-of-justice/
The acting Attorney General in charge of the Justice Department (appointed by Obama, of course) has ordered US attorneys not to defend Trump’s executive orders. Jeff Sessions’ appointment is still pending (the Senate Judiciary Committee will come back to it tomorrow). The Democrats would continue to try to put it off any way they can (they were trying to get Senators to hold up any Trump appointments until they have a chance to get testimony from them on the so-called “Muslim ban”).
And this is just one official at the top of a cabinet department. Multiply it literally by a few hundred thousand throughout the length and breadth of the federal government. Trump’s possible strategy to overwhelm his opponents with activity in the first week has seemed like a great idea, for a week. But if it’s being executed 1) without his own people in places they need to be; 2) with an entire edifice of political enemies in all of the departments and offices he needs to do anything; and 3) in such a way that it scares off Republicans, in Congress and elsewhere, with whom he has, at best, a tenuous and conditional level of support, he’s going to find himself lacking the ability to get much done very quickly.
Shock and awe, bucking the system, and defying everyone’s expectations worked in the election, I’ll grant. But the federal government is big, unwieldy beast that isn’t easy to run under the best of circumstances.
Jeb! is giving a talk at my school. If there is a Q & A, what should I ask him? Can you guys think of any "gotcha" questions on immigration? Should I go for the Richwine angle, or would that be too much?Replies: @yaqub the mad scientist, @Almost Missouri, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @bomag, @MEH 0910
What’s his guacamole recipe? Or do you still have to buy the guac bowl to get it?
DEAR MR. SAILER!!
I do not know hnow to email you, but this seems significant and worth your while.
Foreign Policy has an article on how to remove Mr. Trump, and an article on how to thwart him.
Can you recall a time when the “establishment” was in such oppostion to the Executive?
Check it out.
http://foreignpolicy.com/
Interesting times.
Cohen somehow convinced himself he fathered someone else’s kid. Wacky dude.
Rep. Steve Cohen’s ‘secret daughter’ is not his daughter, DNA tests show
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/reliable-source/wp/2013/07/18/rep-steve-cohens-secret-daughter-is-not-his-daughter-dna-tests-show/?utm_term=.36235ecd9731
BTW, Andre the Giant’s arm bearing the torch should be beefier.
* - God rest his soul.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6gk13I1Y0U
Also there should be a keg of beer in it.Replies: @Pericles
Brilliant.
Problem solved.
A very perceptive comment.
Having been banned from sculpting by divine fiat for millennia, ((( YEHT ))) may have lost the genetic ability to even sculpt any more. This person sees no evidence that ((( YEHT ))) could do it, even if ((( YEHT ))) wanted to.
Alas, there seems no way to even run the experiment.
Just what we Americans need – yet another law telling us, ‘That’s Not Who We Are!’”
“The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government.” – Tacitus
Up until about three decades ago, the need to keep the Southern Democrats on-side kept a lid on the treasonous tendencies of the Party. But they gradually all drifted away.
Up until about three months ago, the need to keep the last working class whites on-side kept a lid on the full-on treason of the Party. But Hillary ditched ’em.
Now, as you observe, there are no more restraints.
Jeb! is giving a talk at my school. If there is a Q & A, what should I ask him? Can you guys think of any "gotcha" questions on immigration? Should I go for the Richwine angle, or would that be too much?Replies: @yaqub the mad scientist, @Almost Missouri, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @bomag, @MEH 0910
• At what number will we have enough immigrants?
[After inevitable mealy mouthed non-answer: “So the number is infinite?”]
• Why would you expect “refugees” to be loyal to their new country when they weren’t loyal to their old country?
• As an owner of a disproportionate share of the nation’s personal wealth, would ¡Jeb! personally host a disproportionate, representative share of the illegal immigrants he wants to amnesty? “Representative” = young, male, no reliable documents.
I can't really see how anyone finds this credible. "It's the right thing to do to let them in, otherwise, they're relatives who are already here will get made and kill us." Talk about argumentum ad baculum ("appeal to the club," i.e., a threat).
The Senate Judiciary committee is supposed to vote on Jeff Sessions' appointment as Attorney General tomorrow and, regardless of that, I really hope Trump's Administration has got some decent legal talent up and working already. The legal knives from not only Soros-funded nonprofit outfits like the ACLU, but now state attorneys general and corporate money are coming in (the Washington State attorney general, with support from Amazon and Expedia, just announced a lawsuit to block Trump's executive order). That's some heavy weight coming down for an administration that's barely a week old and doesn't have everything staffed up. Trump is seriously going to lose a lot of momentum and credibility if he gets tied down like Gulliver by a bunch of lawsuits, stays, and restraining orders.Replies: @27 year old, @ben tillman, @bomag, @JerseyGuy, @Anonymous
Why did he issue this order before the Sessions vote? That was the big challenge for his administration, and he should have kept the controversy to a minimum for a mere 11 days,
So yeah.Replies: @Thomas, @snorlax
Maybe we should sacrifice the statue of liberty to get rid of “the poem”? We can start a campaign that the statue of liberty is “too white” and has an unrealistically shaped body and have the left tear it down for us.
It’s like there hasn’t been a recent natural experiment about what happens when a lot of Islamic refugees are admitted to a Western nation. It’s just crazy talk to think that there would be a spike in rapes and terrorist attacks, like there was in Germany, France, and Sweden. You’d have to be Literally Hitler to think that.
It is probably too early to tell where things are going to end up. I wonder what Trump’s endgame looks like on this one.
After effective HIV treatments were discovered in the mid-90’s, gay rights orgs were taken over by angry lesbians, who changed “GLBT” to “LGBT,” thereby destroying the patriarchy, and when the lesbian obsession, gay marriage, was legalized in the mid-2010’s, they were in turn taken over by even angrier transgenders, who like to focus on promoting trivially-disproven, bizarre revisionist history like everyone at Stonewall was a Transgender Woman of Color.
Jeb! is giving a talk at my school. If there is a Q & A, what should I ask him? Can you guys think of any "gotcha" questions on immigration? Should I go for the Richwine angle, or would that be too much?Replies: @yaqub the mad scientist, @Almost Missouri, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @bomag, @MEH 0910
!Yeb! would you pledge your personal and familial wealth to indemnify the conduct of immigrants to America to compensate victims of immigrant crime for their losses?
Let me remind you that Lot, snorlax, Krikorian, and Kaus were all screaming to the high heavens that we had all been betrayed by that evil Trump and he was never going to fulfill any of his promises.
So yeah.
I've likewise never said that Trump was evil, betraying anyone, etc. I said and say that Priebus, Pence and Ryan are bad influences on the administration's policy. Do you think they're good influences?Replies: @JerseyGuy, @Jack Hanson
What percentage of modern Catholics would you say have a statue of the Virgin Mary on their dash?Replies: @Thomas, @snorlax, @TheJester
A lot higher among the Filipinos than the French.
But there’s a credible case that the commandment was relaxed in the New Testament. (From “don’t create” to “don’t worship”).
It’s true for all immigrants: Time zero is when they arrived. Whoever previously arrived/whatever previously occurred is just an ancient history lesson of no particular significance because it’s someone else’s history…
Dis SOLVE!
So yeah.Replies: @Thomas, @snorlax
Even a stopped clock can be right twice a day. And Trump has yet to fulfill his promises. All he’s really done so far has been to issue orders to do so.
He can certainly still pull this off, but there’s an effort on right now to wrest control away, and it’s got corporate heft and money (https://www.wsj.com/articles/amazon-is-working-with-lawmakers-to-counter-trumps-immigration-order-1485814300) and legal talent (http://www.nationallawjournal.com/home/id=1202777920852/Big-Law-Joins-Opposition-To-Trumps-Refugee-Ban) behind it. Trump needs more than himself, Steve Bannon, Jared Kushner, Reince Priebus, and Kellyanne Conway to run things. Without a government that follows orders, or a party that regards the officeholder as a leader, the Presidency is effectively ceremonial.
If the first real move Trump has made on his signature issue of immigration sees his power to do anything about it effectively diminished and grabbed up by the courts or Congress, that will be a major botch.
"If we don't let them in they'll kill us."
Bending over and biting the pillow worked out real well for the French, Swedes, Germans, etc.Replies: @Dr. X, @Carbon blob, @ben tillman
Kind of like saying “If I put a lock on my door, I’m more likely to be burglarized.”
Interesting to see that at one protest this evening, in Columbus, Ohio, the confrontation has “devolved” and now protesters are primarily taunting police, calling “Here Piggy, Piggy,” chanting “fascist cops” and “f..k the police,” telling officers that they are soldiers of a “fascist police state,” and (protester humor?) hanging donuts from strings in front of the line of police. And many protesters talk about having liquids to neutralize the expected (from the protesters’ comments) tear gas. Should be interesting if overall the protester violence continues to escalate.
Jeb! is giving a talk at my school. If there is a Q & A, what should I ask him? Can you guys think of any "gotcha" questions on immigration? Should I go for the Richwine angle, or would that be too much?Replies: @yaqub the mad scientist, @Almost Missouri, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @bomag, @MEH 0910
Lord Jeff: Mr. Bush, you’ve charac—
Jeb: Please, call me Jeb!, no need for formality here.
Lord Jeff: Jeb!, you’ve characterized undocumented immigration as quote “An act of love.” Shouldn’t such brazen foreign trespassing be called “An act of FUCK?” Because regular Americans are getting fucked.
(Amid boos, some “deplorable” clapping.)
Jeb: Please don’t clap.
Wow! just eleven days into his presidency and Trump has issued orders but hasn’t fulfilled his promises! WTF! Should we all let voter’s remorse setting in? Should we wish her majesty Hillary Rodham Clinton was pulling the levers?
Come on man, get a grip!
I can't really see how anyone finds this credible. "It's the right thing to do to let them in, otherwise, they're relatives who are already here will get made and kill us." Talk about argumentum ad baculum ("appeal to the club," i.e., a threat).
The Senate Judiciary committee is supposed to vote on Jeff Sessions' appointment as Attorney General tomorrow and, regardless of that, I really hope Trump's Administration has got some decent legal talent up and working already. The legal knives from not only Soros-funded nonprofit outfits like the ACLU, but now state attorneys general and corporate money are coming in (the Washington State attorney general, with support from Amazon and Expedia, just announced a lawsuit to block Trump's executive order). That's some heavy weight coming down for an administration that's barely a week old and doesn't have everything staffed up. Trump is seriously going to lose a lot of momentum and credibility if he gets tied down like Gulliver by a bunch of lawsuits, stays, and restraining orders.Replies: @27 year old, @ben tillman, @bomag, @JerseyGuy, @Anonymous
Schumer — another alleged leader who is not much more than a mannequin with a string you pull for the usual blather:
And:
He’s been a senator with leadership positions for almost 20 years, spending it as a political hack. Sitting down in a careful, thoughtful way is the last option on his list.
What are you referring to?
Up until about three months ago, the need to keep the last working class whites on-side kept a lid on the full-on treason of the Party. But Hillary ditched 'em.
Now, as you observe, there are no more restraints.Replies: @Opinionator
Interesting perspective.
He’s* transitioning.
* – God rest his soul.
This guy should certainly be included in any update of Profiles in Courage — #SoBrave.
You can buy Sudecon wipes which help neutralize pepper spray.
Jeb! is giving a talk at my school. If there is a Q & A, what should I ask him? Can you guys think of any "gotcha" questions on immigration? Should I go for the Richwine angle, or would that be too much?Replies: @yaqub the mad scientist, @Almost Missouri, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @bomag, @MEH 0910
Questions:
) Many MENA people immigrate here and build mosques. Scant few from here immigrate to MENA and build churches. What should we do about this imbalance?
) Immigration restriction has been shown to be a winning strategy in recent political elections, but almost no professional politician has heeded the people’s wishes and campaigned on addressing this need. Can you give us any insight as to why the political class has no interest in helping Americans who are desperate for some relief from the overwhelming immigration foisted upon them by the professional political class?
) The evidence is accumulating that the leadership class in this country likes immigrants better than the people already here for many generations. Can you reflect for a few moments on why leaders in this country have come to hate their fellow citizens so much?
A bad poem on an old French statue is not an immigration policy.
There’s a whiff of Idi Amin & Robert Mugabe in the Obey visage. For the US experience, it might make more sense to craft a composite of Josef Stalin, Hugo Chavez & Sonia Sotomayor.
Down to brass tacks, the polling data show that approx 33% oppose Trump’s 7 country restriction. Still estimating that half that (17%) are willing to be the ‘shock troops’ and do this picketing at the airports, etc. This is getting interesting. If I have to cross those pickets, getting ready to give 2x as much as rec’d.
The acting Attorney General in charge of the Justice Department (appointed by Obama, of course) has ordered US attorneys not to defend Trump's executive orders. Jeff Sessions' appointment is still pending (the Senate Judiciary Committee will come back to it tomorrow). The Democrats would continue to try to put it off any way they can (they were trying to get Senators to hold up any Trump appointments until they have a chance to get testimony from them on the so-called "Muslim ban").
And this is just one official at the top of a cabinet department. Multiply it literally by a few hundred thousand throughout the length and breadth of the federal government. Trump's possible strategy to overwhelm his opponents with activity in the first week has seemed like a great idea, for a week. But if it's being executed 1) without his own people in places they need to be; 2) with an entire edifice of political enemies in all of the departments and offices he needs to do anything; and 3) in such a way that it scares off Republicans, in Congress and elsewhere, with whom he has, at best, a tenuous and conditional level of support, he's going to find himself lacking the ability to get much done very quickly.
Shock and awe, bucking the system, and defying everyone's expectations worked in the election, I'll grant. But the federal government is big, unwieldy beast that isn't easy to run under the best of circumstances.Replies: @bomag
This is the thing. I’m always telling people that the biggest change Trump can arrange is to slow down and reverse the bureaucratic plunge into abject SJW doctrine. Right now, bureaucratic peace comes from mouthing and enabling platitudes about diversity, inviting the world, giving stuff away, etc. We need a culture change in the bureaucracy.
I probably should have specified “to see” on the protester’s live steam (that seems to be a requirement of the narcissistic protests these days). Useful information about Sudecon, (for reference!), but I am not on the obscenity chanting, mask wearing, live stream our stupidity to invite the world crowd.
This all-media/government/business tantrum-outrage has me pessimistic. Call it the Veronica Mars syndrome. That show was the lowest rated network/broadcast show ever renewed. It had a rabid audience of less than a million but CW was afraid of the backlash if they canceled it.
People in favor of restricting unvetted Muslim immigration from places with no functioning or cooperative central government are far outweighed in intensity and money by those who:
A. Want no restrictions whatsoever on mass immigration so they keep their cheap H1-B employees: Microsoft, Zuck/Faceborg, Amazon, Starbucks.
B. As Derb noted, older unattractive White women who want to sleep with young Muslim men (that’s the protestors).
C. Status mongering politicians and the media.
These people are intense and have the most money. Ordinary people need to step up and make people feel the pain. Make an example of one judge, one pol, and one business leader.
Howard Schulz is the most vulnerable, so there should be a boycott Starbucks movement and a mass movement of immigration patriots to harass, intimidate, and disrupt Starbucks HQ and make Schulz’s family miserable with in-your-face stuff like the Pizza place that suffered for donating to conservative causes or the bakery that got harassed for not making a gay wedding cake.
Lindsay Graham — why can’t we find one man who will allege that Graham raped him and be persuaded to file suit and go public?
The judge — why can’t we harass, protest, intimidate the judge at his home, his work, his family, etc. Have the families of Katie Steinle and Jamil Shaw protest at his/her kids school, spouse’s workplace, etc.
Missing:
D. 'Migrants' help rent-seekers funnel tax money at their victim groups and themselves. Huge business in Europe, big business in US/CA/AUS.
"If we don't let them in they'll kill us."
Bending over and biting the pillow worked out real well for the French, Swedes, Germans, etc.Replies: @Dr. X, @Carbon blob, @ben tillman
“If we don’t let them in they’ll kill us.”
Interesting how no one ever says this about Mexican migrants or Asian H1B workers.
So yeah.Replies: @Thomas, @snorlax
I said that Trump hasn’t revoked DACA, which was a campaign promise for “day 1.” Have I missed something?
I’ve likewise never said that Trump was evil, betraying anyone, etc. I said and say that Priebus, Pence and Ryan are bad influences on the administration’s policy. Do you think they’re good influences?
Thx for proving me right.Replies: @snorlax
ha ha ha you’re fired:
President Trump Fires Acting Attorney General Yates, Replaces With Dana Boente…
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/01/30/president-trump-fires-acting-attorney-general-yates-replaces-with-dana-boente/
Trump just fired acting director of US Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE), Daniel Ragsdale
Thomas Holman-New acting director******Trump puts in another one of his operatives, large and in charge.Replies: @Anonymous Nephew
"If we don't let them in they'll kill us."
Bending over and biting the pillow worked out real well for the French, Swedes, Germans, etc.Replies: @Dr. X, @Carbon blob, @ben tillman
Someone must have believed it at some time. We have a word for it: appeasement.
I can't really see how anyone finds this credible. "It's the right thing to do to let them in, otherwise, they're relatives who are already here will get made and kill us." Talk about argumentum ad baculum ("appeal to the club," i.e., a threat).
The Senate Judiciary committee is supposed to vote on Jeff Sessions' appointment as Attorney General tomorrow and, regardless of that, I really hope Trump's Administration has got some decent legal talent up and working already. The legal knives from not only Soros-funded nonprofit outfits like the ACLU, but now state attorneys general and corporate money are coming in (the Washington State attorney general, with support from Amazon and Expedia, just announced a lawsuit to block Trump's executive order). That's some heavy weight coming down for an administration that's barely a week old and doesn't have everything staffed up. Trump is seriously going to lose a lot of momentum and credibility if he gets tied down like Gulliver by a bunch of lawsuits, stays, and restraining orders.Replies: @27 year old, @ben tillman, @bomag, @JerseyGuy, @Anonymous
Ugh. This is only Week 2 and the Cathedral already has its eyes on Trump. They are pretty coordinated now. Trump has power, but I’m not sure if he has Deep State power, and sure as hell doesn’t have Cathedral power. If I were Bannon or Miller, I’d be worried. This doesn’t look good.
Jeb! is giving a talk at my school. If there is a Q & A, what should I ask him? Can you guys think of any "gotcha" questions on immigration? Should I go for the Richwine angle, or would that be too much?Replies: @yaqub the mad scientist, @Almost Missouri, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @Jenner Ickham Errican, @bomag, @MEH 0910
I've likewise never said that Trump was evil, betraying anyone, etc. I said and say that Priebus, Pence and Ryan are bad influences on the administration's policy. Do you think they're good influences?Replies: @JerseyGuy, @Jack Hanson
To be honest, he needs them at this point. It’s his only hope, at least in the short term.
Seems like I am hearing A LOT of leftists talking about the assassination of T. What are the betting odds he makes it all four years?
If T is taken out, does that simply harden the deplorables and cause Pence to resume T’s positions? Or is it all over?
In real life, Columba is much shorter than in the cartoon.
Trump definitely gets it done and takes no nonsense. 1st week, he follows through on his campaign promises, and does more in 1 week for the future of the US than any president in my lifetime. Justice Dept refuses to support his acts that benefit the US, he fires her. The only thing the US could do to top voting in Trump would be to revise the rules so that he can serve more than 2 terms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Family_Guy_characters#Other_recurring_characters
http://familyguy.wikia.com/wiki/Consuela
I wouldn’t go that far, although this definitely was a screwup on Bannon and Miller’s part, and an inexcusable one because there had already been controversy and clarification during the campaign about whether what was then the Muslim ban would include green card holders and tourists in transit.
Bannon and Miller need to know that there’s going to be zero margin of error for own goals in this administration, so they can’t be screwing up like this or they’ll bring themselves, and possibly the administration itself, down.
President Trump Fires Acting Attorney General Yates, Replaces With Dana Boente…
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/01/30/president-trump-fires-acting-attorney-general-yates-replaces-with-dana-boente/Replies: @Clyde
So now Trump has one of his own men in charge of that hellhole! DJT must do the same for all Cabinet officers who the Democrats are delaying in the US Senate. Up yours Chuckie Boy!
Breaking:
Trump just fired acting director of US Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE), Daniel Ragsdale
Thomas Holman-New acting director
******Trump puts in another one of his operatives, large and in charge.
People in favor of restricting unvetted Muslim immigration from places with no functioning or cooperative central government are far outweighed in intensity and money by those who:
A. Want no restrictions whatsoever on mass immigration so they keep their cheap H1-B employees: Microsoft, Zuck/Faceborg, Amazon, Starbucks.
B. As Derb noted, older unattractive White women who want to sleep with young Muslim men (that's the protestors).
C. Status mongering politicians and the media.
These people are intense and have the most money. Ordinary people need to step up and make people feel the pain. Make an example of one judge, one pol, and one business leader.
Howard Schulz is the most vulnerable, so there should be a boycott Starbucks movement and a mass movement of immigration patriots to harass, intimidate, and disrupt Starbucks HQ and make Schulz's family miserable with in-your-face stuff like the Pizza place that suffered for donating to conservative causes or the bakery that got harassed for not making a gay wedding cake.
Lindsay Graham -- why can't we find one man who will allege that Graham raped him and be persuaded to file suit and go public?
The judge -- why can't we harass, protest, intimidate the judge at his home, his work, his family, etc. Have the families of Katie Steinle and Jamil Shaw protest at his/her kids school, spouse's workplace, etc.Replies: @theo the kraut, @Almost Missouri
I’m fine with Schulz/Starbucks but harrasing opponents at home/work or their families is fascist tactics, you’re out of your mind in that regard, we’re not the Mafia.
Missing:
D. ‘Migrants’ help rent-seekers funnel tax money at their victim groups and themselves. Huge business in Europe, big business in US/CA/AUS.
Dead Kennedys California Über Alles
Perhaps “If I put a lock on my door, I’m more likely to be vandalized since they can’t steal my possessions as easily.”
I’m getting sick of the idiotic statistics about refugees never killing anyone in a terrorist incident.
1. The Stabby Somali sure as hell tried and stabbed 12 people. He was here on a refugee visa. That was terror.
2. In the last 20 years, if there is a terror incident in the USA, most likely it is Muslim related. Most Muslims are not terrorists, but in the USA, Muslims who are 1% of the population are involved in half the terror incidents. And if it isn’t the refugee or immigrant per se, there children seem to be problems.
3. It’s misanthropic. Women must cover their head? &c.
4. So far, we are lucky that the crazy Muslim attacks seem to be Maladjusted ‘lone wolfs’ …. but once we get underclass Muslims in quantity, they will start effective gangs, cause problems in the prison system, &c.
I’m surprised that Columbus isn’t getting tired of their Stabby Somalians. They have had two this year.
Taken a ‘best case’ approach, one in a million or one in a hundred thousand is crazy enough to run amok of any group of people. If terror attacks becomes a popular form of Islamic American suicide, we have big problems.
The Statue of Liberty symbolizes liberty, hence the name. It was given to us by the French, not by Emma Lazarus. It has jack shit to do with immigration. The French put in all the work to build the statue but Emma Fucking Lazarus gets to decide what it stands for.
Not to mention that four years prior to its dedication a Congress comprised heavily of Union Army veterans (you know, those guys who fought to free the slaves) was passed overwhelmingly by the House (202-37) and the Senate (32-15).
How do companies like Starbucks and Oikos “pledge” to hire lots of refugees? Isn’t that discrimination based on national origin?
I mean thank God/Allah that somebody is hiring them, given their often abysmal employment rates, but how can any company commit to explicitly targeting refugees without explicitly discriminating against American-born workers?
And the people who are discriminated against are the white leftists who fought to allow the immigrants in to take their jobs.
Obey Snoo: http://imgur.com/KYuZfe1
Reddit cofounder Alexis Ohanian’s “open letter to the reddit community”: https://www.reddit.com/r/blog/comments/5r43td/an_open_letter_to_the_reddit_community/
This is weapons-grade schmaltz — he manages to incorporate “nation of immigrants”, the Armenian Genocide, his mother being an “undocumented immigrant from Germany”, Ellis Island, “The New Colossus”, and Lady Liberty’s dimming lamp in only 700 words.
“BTW, Andre the Giant’s arm bearing the torch should be beefier.”
Also there should be a keg of beer in it.
“Serious question: have the Democrats always been this traitorous? I grew up in the 90′s and history class seemed to always leave out the time period from the 60′s onward.”
Bill Clinton, Harry Reid, and Barbara Jordan (a black lesbian liberal Democrat) are all on record opposing policies like illegal immigration, birthright citizenship, and even favoring massive outright reductions in legal immigration – about 20 years ago. I even read an article today about all the Democrats (Jerry Brown, George McGovern, etc.) who back in the 1970s were opposed to admitting Vietnamese refugees (because those people were fleeing communism).
The allegation is repeatedly made that the Republican Party has spent the last two decades moving far, far to the right. The reality is that it is the Democrats who have moved way out to the left, especially on immigration. Hillary Clinton actually praise Angela Merkel for her disastrous refugee admissions program, which plunged Southeast Europe into chaos and admitted into Germany in a single year, on a per capit basis, the equivalent of admitting 3-4 million refugees into America.
If US flag can be made into a Burka, I wonder if how Muslims would react if their Crescent flag were turned into a Bikini or Woman’s underwear(in solidarity with Pussy Power)?
If red, white, and blue are good enough for Islam, then the Crescent is good enough for Amerikan culture.
The HOPE guy should draw such pic.
I mean thank God/Allah that somebody is hiring them, given their often abysmal employment rates, but how can any company commit to explicitly targeting refugees without explicitly discriminating against American-born workers?Replies: @Lurker, @Cletus Rothschild
You and your white ‘logic’ oppressing PoC!
Not to mention that four years prior to its dedication a Congress comprised heavily of Union Army veterans (you know, those guys who fought to free the slaves) was passed overwhelmingly by the House (202-37) and the Senate (32-15).Replies: @Wilkey
I meant this to read: “Not to mention that four years prior to its dedication a Congress comprised heavily of Union Army veterans (you know, those guys who fought to free the slaves) overwhelmingly voted in favor of the Chinese Exclusion Act (202-37 in the House, 32-15 in the Senate).
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/lester-holt-anchors-nbc-nightly-news-tonight-with-statue-of-liberty-in-background/
But why promote more immigration when nearly all immigrants are gentiles?
Because they are non-white gentiles, and that means their increasing presence will lead to fracturing of the gentile population, making it difficult for a unified gentile power to challenge Jewish elite power.
These new immigrants are not Jewish and will never be Jewish -- and may even feel anti-Jewish, BUT they are the un-whites, even anti-whites. Thus, they are useful to the ruling globalist elites in undermining the possibility of unified gentile nationalism.Replies: @Anonymous, @bomag
Because they are non-white gentiles, and that means their increasing presence will lead to fracturing of the gentile population, making it difficult for a unified gentile power to challenge Jewish elite power.
It does more than that: It delivers a death blow by diluting the European genome.
No, Steve has to make another 20 posts about obey giant before we can have serious discussion.
Oh gtfo with your mendacious bullshit and handwringing about maybe possibles.
He’s done more in two weeks than any president since Eisenhower.
Here are some job approval ratings showing initial vs. 100 days. Should we start a pool on where Trump ends up in this table?
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/100days_approval.php
P.S. Are you referring to Korea? https://100days.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/11/how-to-end-a-war-eisenhowers-way/
Here is his trip to Korea, but that was a few weeks after election, not inauguration: http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/eisenhower-goes-to-korea
I've likewise never said that Trump was evil, betraying anyone, etc. I said and say that Priebus, Pence and Ryan are bad influences on the administration's policy. Do you think they're good influences?Replies: @JerseyGuy, @Jack Hanson
And Ben was asking why he did this so fast. And I said because short sighted cry babies like you had no tactical sense, let alone strategic sense, and forced his hand squealing like pigs about betrayal.
Thx for proving me right.
I will be more careful with my internet blog comments in the future.Replies: @Jack Hanson
Well we better just quit now I guess.
I can't really see how anyone finds this credible. "It's the right thing to do to let them in, otherwise, they're relatives who are already here will get made and kill us." Talk about argumentum ad baculum ("appeal to the club," i.e., a threat).
The Senate Judiciary committee is supposed to vote on Jeff Sessions' appointment as Attorney General tomorrow and, regardless of that, I really hope Trump's Administration has got some decent legal talent up and working already. The legal knives from not only Soros-funded nonprofit outfits like the ACLU, but now state attorneys general and corporate money are coming in (the Washington State attorney general, with support from Amazon and Expedia, just announced a lawsuit to block Trump's executive order). That's some heavy weight coming down for an administration that's barely a week old and doesn't have everything staffed up. Trump is seriously going to lose a lot of momentum and credibility if he gets tied down like Gulliver by a bunch of lawsuits, stays, and restraining orders.Replies: @27 year old, @ben tillman, @bomag, @JerseyGuy, @Anonymous
White House wanted Kobach as Deputy at DHS, and DHS head Kelly refused.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/317017-report-kelly-clashed-with-wh-over-staffing-decisions
However, some of these folks give off the vibe that they are so wonderful that the President needs them and that *they* rather than the President was elected. I saw screw 'em.
If the President wants Kobach, and Kelly really doesn't want Kobach, Trump should call Kelly in and fire him. The press would of course have a field day with this "disorder"\"incompetence" in the Trump administration. But it would be great for Trump. The message to all his staffers would be that they are there to carry out *Trump's* ideas of what's bests for the American people, not their own.
Bannon and Miller could get themselves booted out and Preibus and Pence take over completely and run the Trump Administration as just another Bush-style GOP administration.
https://mobile.twitter.com/jaketapper/status/826101988454780928
https://mobile.twitter.com/JoeNBC/status/826069511510061056
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-immigration-congress-order-234392
Apparently, the Administration had staffers from the House Judiciary Committee secretly working on the executive order, had them sign Non-Disclosure Agreements, and didn't tell the committee chairman (Bob Goodlatte, R-VA), nor anyone else in Congress about it.
This was a really dumb move. Republicans in Congress are going to take it has having poached their staff, inveigled them to work behind their backs, and then left them with a political hand grenade to deal with with no notice. This was not the way to win friends and influence people among Republicans on the Hill.Replies: @Anonymous, @Jack Hanson
Thx for proving me right.Replies: @snorlax
You’re right, I have posted too many internet blog comments without being sufficiently cognizant of my newfound responsibilities as one of the most powerful men in the world.
I will be more careful with my internet blog comments in the future.
Reddit cofounder Alexis Ohanian's "open letter to the reddit community": https://www.reddit.com/r/blog/comments/5r43td/an_open_letter_to_the_reddit_community/
This is weapons-grade schmaltz -- he manages to incorporate "nation of immigrants", the Armenian Genocide, his mother being an "undocumented immigrant from Germany", Ellis Island, "The New Colossus", and Lady Liberty's dimming lamp in only 700 words.Replies: @Pericles
If not for open borders, we would never have had Reddit, you guys!
Also there should be a keg of beer in it.Replies: @Pericles
And the text should be BEER, presumably.
http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article129307074.html#storylink=twt_staff
Thank you, Richard Spencer.Replies: @Amasius
Another quotation citation for the Democrats are total hypocrites file.
Dear Mr Cohen,
I guess there are numerous protests condemning the fact that 16 countries deny entry to Israelis.
Where can I join?
I found it very worrisome that there wasn’t much Democratic opposition to Kelly.
From the WSJ article:
This is extremely troubling; it’s looking like Kelly might’ve been a worse choice than McCaul, let alone Kobach.
Richard Spencer’s claim that he mentored Stephen Miller has now been picked up by both CNN’s Jake Tapper and Morning Joe.
https://mobile.twitter.com/jaketapper/status/826101988454780928
https://mobile.twitter.com/JoeNBC/status/826069511510061056
Possibly unfair to characterize risk as their getting themselves booted out. Everyone in power in the country is gunning for them because they two are really the only force for change anywhere near power. Risk is that they get booted out. Full stop.
“Hill staffers secretly worked on Trump’s immigration order,” Politico.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-immigration-congress-order-234392
Apparently, the Administration had staffers from the House Judiciary Committee secretly working on the executive order, had them sign Non-Disclosure Agreements, and didn’t tell the committee chairman (Bob Goodlatte, R-VA), nor anyone else in Congress about it.
This was a really dumb move. Republicans in Congress are going to take it has having poached their staff, inveigled them to work behind their backs, and then left them with a political hand grenade to deal with with no notice. This was not the way to win friends and influence people among Republicans on the Hill.
Hi Boethiusssss.
Kobach weighs run for Kansas governor as likelihood of Washington role fades.
Thank you, Richard Spencer.
Perhaps the guy has spelling issues? And he thinks it’s the Statute of Liberty?
I don’t agree. Trump has an unknown margin of error. It appears to be zero, because of the size, intensity, power, and (mainstream) legitimacy of his opposition. But why haven’t they buried him already? Okay, there was lag time, between when they started to give him heavy press and when they took him seriously. But that time is long past.
Trump has been through pseudo-scandals that would have killed similar politicians’ careers, and kept on ticking. I don’t see any reason to believe they’ll bring the administration down if it screws up again. Vanishingly few administrations have ever been brought down.
Trump seems different because of the ridiculous fake-outrage ( I don’t really believe them) explosions. But they were doing that before the election, and see what happened. Besides, it’s not as if the screw-ups were that bad. I, for one, don’t care. As for those it does look bad to, BFD. He didn’t destroy a country as part of the War on Terror only to turn it into a terrorist state, or anything.
Not sure if it’s necessary, since Trump probably has the power to restrict immigration on his own now, but, as a jujitsu move, what would you think of Trump putting the Democrats’ worldview to a vote in Congress?
Have an ally in Congress propose legislation that says something to this effect:
The legislation could estimate the net costs associated with that level of immigration and fund it.
One benefit of introducing this as legislation would be to reify demographic change as a political question, rather than an inevitable force of nature. Once that’s acknowledged, we can debate the sort of demographic mix we want.
Have an ally in Congress propose legislation that says something to this effect:The legislation could estimate the net costs associated with that level of immigration and fund it.
One benefit of introducing this as legislation would be to reify demographic change as a political question, rather than an inevitable force of nature. Once that's acknowledged, we can debate the sort of demographic mix we want.Replies: @snorlax
Explicit white nationalism would not be a winning strategy. Knowing “mainstream” Republicans, even those just a half-step to the left of Breitbart (like Ace) would be very turned off.
The 55% of GOP primary voters who didn’t vote for Trump (and many of the 45% who did) really do consider ostensible colorblindness a core conviction.
See also: David Duke.
The big danger is that Trump would decide he doesn’t need the aggravation and fires the good guys and turns his Administration over to the housebroken conventional Republicans who go back to Invite/Invade orthodoxy. For example, Mitterand pretty much did that to the left in France in 1983 after a couple of years of leftist tumult and went on to enjoy a long reign.
The big risk is that these guys don't establish the support with the public, with the civil service, and with Congress that they need to be able to govern. The most important one is the public. The EO debacle has really hurt.Replies: @Thomas, @AnotherDad
If Bannon and Miller go, it’s over.
If T is taken out, does that simply harden the deplorables and cause Pence to resume T's positions? Or is it all over?Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
If “A LOT of leftists talking” get their presumed wish, they may sorely regret the reaction. Basically, the Silent Majority won’t be silent anymore. Whether or not Pence would keep Trump’s policies, the American Cold Civil War will turn Hot. I doubt many Pink Pussy Hats or SAG Awards grandees realize the fragility of domestic Pax Americana.
My May 2016 view (#120) of the ‘State of the Nation’ heading into the election:
Thank you, Richard Spencer.Replies: @Amasius
Yes, Richard Spencer saying “Hail Victory” and raising his glass three months ago is the reason “racist” Kris Kobach isn’t getting a job in Washington. Even though “racist” Donald Trump won the election, and “racist” Jeff Sessions is going to be AG, and “racist,” “anti-Semitic” Steve Bannon is a chief advisor and will sit on the security council.
Evil Nazi Richard ruined it all with a toast at his conference outside of which antifa terrorists had beaten a cameraman half to death and sprayed Emily Youcis and Spencer and Peter Brimelow with liquid shit, after which his non-political MOTHER was harassed and suffered an attempted shakedown at the hands of the jewish mafia, soon after which he was viciously suckerpunched by an antifa terrorist and viciously suckerpunched again during an interview by another antifa terrorist who got away with it while thousands of trolls mocked him and reveled in the blow. BUT WE KNOW who the bad guy is. It’s the man who raised his glass and said “Hail Victory.” Our priorities are straight. Seriously, screw that guy for taking his own side in an argument and standing up for his people.
Plus he might even be an alcoholic.
How is Spencer's popping up everywhere on national media during the inauguration weekend--keeping the Nazi and White nationalism and ethnic cleansing memes fresh in the public's mind around an event associated with Trump--supposed to help public perception of Trump?
Can you explain that to us?Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Amasius
Trump won’t give up willingly. He’s been through too much. And not after Obama pipes up today and after the Yates betrayal.
The big risk is that these guys don’t establish the support with the public, with the civil service, and with Congress that they need to be able to govern. The most important one is the public. The EO debacle has really hurt.
He ought to rally them to keep the pressure on Congress.
A basic problem though always with Trump the candidate, and now maybe Trump the President, is handling the basic block and tackle of the job. Maybe Bannon and Miller are these 4th Generation Warfare disruptors or whatever, but the problem is that this is still a big, conservative country with the world's longest-functioning electoral democracy, and that there are a lot of power centers (kind of the point of divided government). Trump can run to the public (or at least his base) every now and then for some extra energy, but if they start to abandon him, disappointed in the job he's doing, they're going to be hard to get back, and nobody else will have his back. I can see the basic logic of doing the hard work (immigration and refugees) early, when he's still got the most strength he's going to have, but the rollout has been very sketchy.
By the way, the Yates situation may be a total violation of attorney ethical obligations on her part. Attorneys working for the government retain similar duties to clients (in their case, the Executive Branch, you can see what the DOJ has to say about ethical responsibilities here: https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/oarm/docs/oarm9.pdf) as do private sector attorneys. Lawyers are not allowed to hang their clients out to dry publicly like this, or otherwise undermine their cases, just because they don't agree with their legal position (if your client is taking a legal position you think isn't what the law is, as a lawyer, you're generally just supposed to quit and keep your mouth shut, at worst). Nobody is much noting this because 1) Trump = evil; and 2) possibly he doesn't have any lawyers around him smart enough to point it out to him. She could though be reported wherever she's a member of the bar. And it would possibly flip the script to "the system won't even follow the law, they're so desperate to stop Trump."Replies: @res
Is it white nationalism to prefer a majority (but by no means entirely) white country? Particularly when the distinction would be of “white” so much as, say, NATO-European. If the question of what the country’s demographic mix should be is taboo, then, by default, it will trend toward what Democrats want it to be.
It would be smarter to define white nationalism narrowly (and more accurately) as the desire for an exclusively white nation, then draw a cordon sanitaire separating the views of Steve Sailer, Mickey Kaus, and Mark Krikorian from those of David Duke, Richard Spencer, and similar.
I'll note however, that your very question there is precisely why once you give up having a nation with an acknowledged ethnic core and embrace stuff like "color blindness" as your alternative core value, you end up with problems. It really is a slippery slope.
I don't think it's very hard to explain the case intellectually:
-- America is historically an Anglo nation and thrives because of Anglo rule-of-law tradition and more broadly European people and the culture of Western, Christian civilization.
-- To continue to be "America" we want to preserve those characteristics.
-- But under law all citizens are to be treated equally without regard to racial\ethnic background.
But it has proven very hard to actually *keep* walking along that edge without slipping off. Even saying something obvious like "America is nice--prosperous, free--because of white people" would be scandalous even though it's absolutely obvious. Heck, Romney got in trouble for the completely non-arguable point of English heritage.
Now part of the difficulty is because of specific ethnic hostility\activism always pushing politics and culture off that edge. But part of it is because the edge is so darn slick, especially if you are a people--a Christian people--who fundamentally want to be "nice".Replies: @JerryC, @Dave Pinsen
You vastly overestimate how motivated the public is.
It would be a hell of a test of Pence’s character and ability as President, because all trust between differing Americans will have long been shattered. If the government does its job, and protects patriotic Americans against All Enemies, Foreign And Domestic, the general public won’t have to get directly involved.
How should we describe a preference or a politics that is in favor of the United States having a White majority?
Once identity politics gets spread around evenly, "it" will just happen, in my opinion. That'll be the tendency of "woke" white people, with or without a name.
"It" will be too late, by the way.Replies: @Opinionator
https://twitter.com/dpinsen/status/669276877471809536Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
I don’t think we need to describe it. Just call it “it,” if you want. The pushers of non-white majorianism don’t have a name for what they’re doing. Or not an honest name, anyway.
Once identity politics gets spread around evenly, “it” will just happen, in my opinion. That’ll be the tendency of “woke” white people, with or without a name.
“It” will be too late, by the way.
They do: diversity; multiculturalism; Our values; The Economy.Replies: @Steve Sailer, @guest
Call it whatever you want to, but if you should even acknowledge the existence of White people without hating on them you’ll get called a Nazi and be forced to curl up in a ball. Maybe it would be better to take a strong, principled stance and hope it finds receptive ears as we slide towards chaos and civil war.
That’s a good question. I suppose you could get a similar effect while taking “white majority” out of it. Call it Greenism — we’re for immigration from countries where it’s safe to drink the water.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-immigration-congress-order-234392
Apparently, the Administration had staffers from the House Judiciary Committee secretly working on the executive order, had them sign Non-Disclosure Agreements, and didn't tell the committee chairman (Bob Goodlatte, R-VA), nor anyone else in Congress about it.
This was a really dumb move. Republicans in Congress are going to take it has having poached their staff, inveigled them to work behind their backs, and then left them with a political hand grenade to deal with with no notice. This was not the way to win friends and influence people among Republicans on the Hill.Replies: @Anonymous, @Jack Hanson
Have there been any signs yet of the GOPe trying to sucker the Bannon-Miller wing into making deadly mistakes?
The big risk is that these guys don't establish the support with the public, with the civil service, and with Congress that they need to be able to govern. The most important one is the public. The EO debacle has really hurt.Replies: @Thomas, @AnotherDad
Supposedly, the EO situation isn’t hurting Trump yet much with his base: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-immigration-supporters-idUSKBN15E0BH
He ought to rally them to keep the pressure on Congress.
A basic problem though always with Trump the candidate, and now maybe Trump the President, is handling the basic block and tackle of the job. Maybe Bannon and Miller are these 4th Generation Warfare disruptors or whatever, but the problem is that this is still a big, conservative country with the world’s longest-functioning electoral democracy, and that there are a lot of power centers (kind of the point of divided government). Trump can run to the public (or at least his base) every now and then for some extra energy, but if they start to abandon him, disappointed in the job he’s doing, they’re going to be hard to get back, and nobody else will have his back. I can see the basic logic of doing the hard work (immigration and refugees) early, when he’s still got the most strength he’s going to have, but the rollout has been very sketchy.
By the way, the Yates situation may be a total violation of attorney ethical obligations on her part. Attorneys working for the government retain similar duties to clients (in their case, the Executive Branch, you can see what the DOJ has to say about ethical responsibilities here: https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/oarm/docs/oarm9.pdf) as do private sector attorneys. Lawyers are not allowed to hang their clients out to dry publicly like this, or otherwise undermine their cases, just because they don’t agree with their legal position (if your client is taking a legal position you think isn’t what the law is, as a lawyer, you’re generally just supposed to quit and keep your mouth shut, at worst). Nobody is much noting this because 1) Trump = evil; and 2) possibly he doesn’t have any lawyers around him smart enough to point it out to him. She could though be reported wherever she’s a member of the bar. And it would possibly flip the script to “the system won’t even follow the law, they’re so desperate to stop Trump.”
Given the additional ethical constraints on lawyers it sounds like this would make a good test case for all of the organizational resistance Trump is likely to encounter.
Any hot conflict would likely start with the extremes in the form of rolling volley tit-for-tat violent action between ‘black bloc’ Leftists and lone wolf Breivik types. Both types will have sympathy and approval from a larger number of aligned non-combatants. Non-ideological criminal types will add to the chaos for the thrill of it. The Right isn’t generally into mass demonstrations, but the Left will increase their marches/riots, leading to authoritarian crackdowns for reasons of security.
It would be a hell of a test of Pence’s character and ability as President, because all trust between differing Americans will have long been shattered. If the government does its job, and protects patriotic Americans against All Enemies, Foreign And Domestic, the general public won’t have to get directly involved.
Starting to think that might be a great thing.
Once identity politics gets spread around evenly, "it" will just happen, in my opinion. That'll be the tendency of "woke" white people, with or without a name.
"It" will be too late, by the way.Replies: @Opinionator
The pushers of non-white majorianism don’t have a name for what they’re doing. Or not an honest name, anyway.
They do: diversity; multiculturalism; Our values; The Economy.
I haven’t seen any. My impression is that the GOPe had mostly and finally resolved over the past month or so to give Trump a good faith chance and support. The EO debacle has harmed that trust. Tragic.
stop. take a deep breath. walk back from the ledge. debacle=complete failure or breakdown.
According to Rasmussen, 57% support a temporary ban on Muslims.
How is Spencer’s claiming to national media to have mentored Stephen Miller supposed to help Trump?
How is Spencer’s popping up everywhere on national media during the inauguration weekend–keeping the Nazi and White nationalism and ethnic cleansing memes fresh in the public’s mind around an event associated with Trump–supposed to help public perception of Trump?
Can you explain that to us?
Now don’t go running to a mirror!
What did Richard Spencer ever say that wasn't true? Why do you insist on doing the enemy's job for them by attacking him? Why don't you fire on the real bad people? Why are you so afraid to stand up for your own kind and instead side with suckerpunchers and extorters and shit sprayers and terrorists who want our people wiped off the face of the Earth? Who's actually suffering ethnic cleansing in this country? Do you think half-measures, non-measures, and appeasement are going to do the trick? Whites are already a minority of children in this country, bro. We're still on track for issuing one million non-White greencards this year, and the next, and the next, bro.
How do you propose to win this one, bro? Beg the left that wants us dead to "please, please, please let us White people maintain a 51% majority in the country we built! We're so sorry Richard Spencer raised his glass and said 'peaceful ethnic cleansing' instead of 'population transfer' that one time. I'm so sorry he existed during the inauguration and got socked in the face and suffered a black eye and hearing loss... clearly he deserved it for being a Nazi! Just like we White people deserve a quasi-homeland... because I'm nice and Richard Spencer is a Nazi! I'm a GoodWhite!"
Do you think you'll ever win if you let Van Jones and Ta-Nehisi Coates determine what you're allowed to say? Trump (or anyone else) literally cannot even say the phrase "White people" unless it is in a negative context without being called a Nazi. Things are really bad, dude; we're getting creamed. Why not take your own side in the argument?Replies: @anon
When Emma Lazarus called out to the huddled masses in the 19th century, there was a good chance that many of the poor and wretched in Europe were indeed people of innate ability who weren’t given a chance over there and could thrive with opportunity and freedom over here.
They were wretched by circumstances, not by genetic inheritance.
Since then, all the world has had ample time to modernize, develop, and build working economies.
That includes the Third World and post-communist nations of Eastern Europe.
So, there’s no more excuse to remain wretched. All the world has access to the same technologies and ideas. If some nations made progress and if some didn’t, the difference surely owes a lot to genetic differences.
So, if some nations are still filled with wretched people, there’s a good chance that they are wretched by birth. (It certainly doesn’t help that Muslims are into cousin marriage.)
At many rate, if the GLOB insists that the poor nations are filled with an abundance of wonderful, energetic, enterprising, and resourceful people who can do much for America, our reply should be, “the US is already very rich, very powerful, and very abundant with talented people. So, don’t help the US. Don’t do it any more favors. If you have talent and energy, be patriotic and build your own poor country OR be generous and go help a poorer country by emigrating there. Coming to the US and adding to the American economy is like giving a rich man more money and doing him more favors. Take your talent to poor nations that can really use your energy and vision.”
It’s like the NBA is already filled with top players. It doesn’t need more talent. If you got talent, build your own national team that can really use your talent. Why should talented people around the world do all the favors for America, already the richest nation in the world by far? Why add more to the nation that already has too much? Why not add to nations with less? Their talents will be far more precious and valuable to poor nations.
It’s like, if a city has too many doctors, it doesn’t need any more. So, excess doctors should serve other towns and communities.
What percentage of modern Catholics would you say have a statue of the Virgin Mary on their dash?Replies: @Thomas, @snorlax, @TheJester
The difference, Catholics and Orthodox say, is that their images only remind worshippers of the person being venerated or worshiped. The images are not being venerated or worshiped, hence they are not the craven images of the Bible.
On the order of the Emperor, the Byzantine or Eastern Orthodox Church temporarily banned the veneration of images in the 8th Century on the model of Islam. The common explanation is that the Byzantine Empire was taken back by recent Muslim military successes that rolled up large tracts of the Empire. The Emperor wanted to cover his odds by making sure the latter was not God’s punishment for blasphemy.
The ban didn’t last. The Christain worshippers loved them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Iconoclasm
https://twitter.com/dpinsen/status/669276877471809536Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
Unfortunately, cutesy names for pro-white demographic policies won’t work. Unlike “Steven Colbert,” the left definitely sees race and counts race. They’ll just apply global-scale proportional “disparate impact” logic to any tacitly pro-white intake policy. And of course, bleeding hearts would love to rescue huddled, thirsty masses from the (sub-Slavic) Red Zone. That map is awesome, though.
“. . . but all of the New Colossus craziness reminds me how repeatedly and heavily idolatry was proscribed against for the Hebrews in the Bible.”
That’s an interesting point. There are a lot of rules in the bible that people follow (or not) just because God said so. But if you dig enough, you can often find a usefulness to the rules. In this case, perhaps blindly following graven images leads people to do things that are batshit crazy.
They do: diversity; multiculturalism; Our values; The Economy.Replies: @Steve Sailer, @guest
It’s Who We Are
I mean thank God/Allah that somebody is hiring them, given their often abysmal employment rates, but how can any company commit to explicitly targeting refugees without explicitly discriminating against American-born workers?Replies: @Lurker, @Cletus Rothschild
“How do companies like Starbucks and Oikos “pledge” to hire lots of refugees? Isn’t that discrimination based on national origin?”
And the people who are discriminated against are the white leftists who fought to allow the immigrants in to take their jobs.
The Today Show opened yesterday with Trump-baching that continued non-stop until Al Roeker finally appeared to discuss the weather at 7:17. Of course, it was more or less like that throughout the campaign, and Trump overcame it.
The federal judiciary seems to be pretty lawless–actually to have evolved a “l’etat c’est moi” culture, where the judges (and their lawyer acolytes) don’t even believe their role is confined by the law–for quite a while. (Crap like Roe v. Wade and the homo-marriage thing are only the most obvious constitutionally unmoored judicial pronouncements–tip of the iceberg.)
The President and Congress are actually bound by oath to protect and defend the constitution. If they believe the federal courts are decreeing unconstitutionally, they not only can ignore them, they *should* be ignoring them. This idea that everyone else with a constitutional duty is supposed to jump back when some federal judge goes off on his\her moral preening tantrum is ridiculous–and actually bad for real constitutional governance. It appeals to lawyers–all questions decided by us–but isn’t healthy for an actual republic of free self-governing citizens.
(BTW, the havoc that this sort of judicial super-legislative law making does to the idea of a republic is a good reason for treating it with the utmost contempt and applying the most severe sanction against its perpetrators. It ought to be a capital crime.)
~~
Not a lawyer, much less an immigration lawyer–happy to hear the input of one–but my ordinary citizen’s read of immigration law gives the President pretty wide latitude to decrease immigration.
US immigration law seems to have a bunch–far too many–categories for various visas including immigration visas, plus various numbers and quotas. I.e. it puts specific legal limits on immigration. It would be illegal for a President–like Obama did–to just try and make up new category. However, there is nothing in immigration law that says the President as chief administrator of the immigration (and state department) bureaucracy *must* issue every last little visa that could be issued. Nor that he can’t order his subordinates to issue visas to people in these countries and not in these other countries–or be very circumspect in these countries compared to these other countries. (In fact, US presidents have always done this.) If Trump decides say we don’t actually have a shortage of young women in the US and decides to order the bureaucracy to issue *no* nanny visas–we apparently have such a category!–that’s perfectly legal. Likewise if Trump decides to have his bureaucracy to refuse to issue any visas to Saudi Arabians or Muslims or communists or Jews or Christians or whites or blacks or Chinese or … *whomever*, that’s perfectly legal.
As I see it there is not only no moral right for any foreign to come to the United States, but there is no particular legal right under US law, even if you think you qualify and have done your paperwork. That’s what being a foreigner means. (When I travel i’m under no illusion that I have any *right* to be in someone else’s country–just visiting it. Much less would I think I have the right to come and park my ass there.)
It is part of the ongoing struggle between majority rule and basic rights. The court keeps expanding what they consider basic rights until they are in every facet of social activity.
But why promote more immigration when nearly all immigrants are gentiles?
Because they are non-white gentiles, and that means their increasing presence will lead to fracturing of the gentile population, making it difficult for a unified gentile power to challenge Jewish elite power.
These new immigrants are not Jewish and will never be Jewish -- and may even feel anti-Jewish, BUT they are the un-whites, even anti-whites. Thus, they are useful to the ruling globalist elites in undermining the possibility of unified gentile nationalism.Replies: @Anonymous, @bomag
The problem here is that we had unified nationalism, then lost it; or gave it away.
Why blame Jews for looking out for their interests? EVERY group that comes here starts setting up their ethnic enclave and gets behind the alphabet soup of interest groups. If all the Jews disappeared tomorrow, we’ll have the exact same problems: the Mexicans taking over large swaths of California et al; the dot Indians doing their thing; the Chinese on the move; the Muslims building mosques as fast as they can; etc., all with the White gentiles cheering them on, donating time and money to those causes while mumbling the usual catch phrases in a glassy eyed, slack-jawed topor: “diversity is our strength”; “I’m not a racist, and I’ll prove it by embracing the Other in every way possible while giving him my stuff”.
The problem is in the mirror.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thou_shalt_not_make_unto_thee_any_graven_image
I get the impression it was (and is) definitely the worship of graven images that’s a problem, rather than the images themselves. More problematic is surely praying to saints – I know the idea is that they intercede with God on our behalf, but I bet Jews don’t pray to Moses, Samuel or Abraham, no matter how well they may have served the Lord.
Trump just fired acting director of US Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE), Daniel Ragsdale
Thomas Holman-New acting director******Trump puts in another one of his operatives, large and in charge.Replies: @Anonymous Nephew
To paraphrase Danton in 1793 – “The coalesced SJWs threaten us, we hurl at their feet, as gage of battle, the head of an SJW !”
IMMIGRATION: THE FINAL SOLVTION.
I realize successful\competent people often have big egos, and often have “their people” that they’ve worked with and trust.
However, some of these folks give off the vibe that they are so wonderful that the President needs them and that *they* rather than the President was elected. I saw screw ’em.
If the President wants Kobach, and Kelly really doesn’t want Kobach, Trump should call Kelly in and fire him. The press would of course have a field day with this “disorder”\”incompetence” in the Trump administration. But it would be great for Trump. The message to all his staffers would be that they are there to carry out *Trump’s* ideas of what’s bests for the American people, not their own.
I bet Cohen respects the original settlers and colonists. Of Israel.
Yeah, it’s a (((cathedral))). Oh, wait, they already have a word for that: synagogue.
Moldbuggerism: noticing lite. Milquetoast noticing.
They seem far too aggressive and determined to be sappy, sentimental, dumbasses. And the idea that (((Schumer))) and (((Cohen))) suddenly turn into saps on some issue, well, it’s weak tea. Especially when you consider their close relationship to Israel, and her immigration policies.
How could we have Jews as the powerhouse of the left, and representing a huge chunk of the political giving in this country (inter alia), without Jews?
Sounds like conclusions designed to convince normal, PC-brained folks. I'm not surprised whatsoever to find religious roots in the current ruling class ideology, be they Jewish or Unitarian. Only an ignorant lefty could be red-pilled by realizing "OMG, we're, like, totally ruled by Puritans!"
It just isn't rhetorically effective on my brain. Richard Dawkins', maybe.Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Desiderius
Reflection isn’t exactly a left strength, but isn’t “Statue of Liberty Values Act” almost pushing toward oxymoron status.
The “value” promoted by the Statue of Liberty is obviously …. Liberty.
And seriously, no Democrat has had much interest–outside of a few little one off back alleys–in “liberty” for 50+. The are promoters of the super-state and often quite hostile to the notion of actual general liberty.
The President and Congress are actually bound by oath to protect and defend the constitution. If they believe the federal courts are decreeing unconstitutionally, they not only can ignore them, they *should* be ignoring them. This idea that everyone else with a constitutional duty is supposed to jump back when some federal judge goes off on his\her moral preening tantrum is ridiculous--and actually bad for real constitutional governance. It appeals to lawyers--all questions decided by us--but isn't healthy for an actual republic of free self-governing citizens.
(BTW, the havoc that this sort of judicial super-legislative law making does to the idea of a republic is a good reason for treating it with the utmost contempt and applying the most severe sanction against its perpetrators. It ought to be a capital crime.)
~~
Not a lawyer, much less an immigration lawyer--happy to hear the input of one--but my ordinary citizen's read of immigration law gives the President pretty wide latitude to decrease immigration.
US immigration law seems to have a bunch--far too many--categories for various visas including immigration visas, plus various numbers and quotas. I.e. it puts specific legal limits on immigration. It would be illegal for a President--like Obama did--to just try and make up new category. However, there is nothing in immigration law that says the President as chief administrator of the immigration (and state department) bureaucracy *must* issue every last little visa that could be issued. Nor that he can't order his subordinates to issue visas to people in these countries and not in these other countries--or be very circumspect in these countries compared to these other countries. (In fact, US presidents have always done this.) If Trump decides say we don't actually have a shortage of young women in the US and decides to order the bureaucracy to issue *no* nanny visas--we apparently have such a category!--that's perfectly legal. Likewise if Trump decides to have his bureaucracy to refuse to issue any visas to Saudi Arabians or Muslims or communists or Jews or Christians or whites or blacks or Chinese or ... *whomever*, that's perfectly legal.
As I see it there is not only no moral right for any foreign to come to the United States, but there is no particular legal right under US law, even if you think you qualify and have done your paperwork. That's what being a foreigner means. (When I travel i'm under no illusion that I have any *right* to be in someone else's country--just visiting it. Much less would I think I have the right to come and park my ass there.)Replies: @bomag
Agree with what you say.
It is part of the ongoing struggle between majority rule and basic rights. The court keeps expanding what they consider basic rights until they are in every facet of social activity.
I’m 100% with Dave.
I’ll note however, that your very question there is precisely why once you give up having a nation with an acknowledged ethnic core and embrace stuff like “color blindness” as your alternative core value, you end up with problems. It really is a slippery slope.
I don’t think it’s very hard to explain the case intellectually:
— America is historically an Anglo nation and thrives because of Anglo rule-of-law tradition and more broadly European people and the culture of Western, Christian civilization.
— To continue to be “America” we want to preserve those characteristics.
— But under law all citizens are to be treated equally without regard to racial\ethnic background.
But it has proven very hard to actually *keep* walking along that edge without slipping off. Even saying something obvious like “America is nice–prosperous, free–because of white people” would be scandalous even though it’s absolutely obvious. Heck, Romney got in trouble for the completely non-arguable point of English heritage.
Now part of the difficulty is because of specific ethnic hostility\activism always pushing politics and culture off that edge. But part of it is because the edge is so darn slick, especially if you are a people–a Christian people–who fundamentally want to be “nice”.
Living standards have already started to slip in the U.S.
That is the question. If you’re right, then it makes sense to address it explicitly sooner rather than later and to respond to accusations of WN by asking what % majority one would have to desire to be considered one. If most people concede that preferring a 51% W country doesn’t make you David Duke, you can have a discussion about what the actual % should be.
In this interview (question at 4:20, Bloomberg Politics via WaPo), Trump handled repeated attempted gotcha questions about Duke without flinching or throwing unnamed “white supremacist” supporters under the bus. Trump actually turned his sarcastic repudiation of Duke into a brag about Duke’s praise:This is not to say Trump actually gives a rat’s ass about David Duke the man. But Trump was/is smart enough to know that a lot of his support comes from at least casually racist ‘deplorables.’ Not all of those racists are unthinking bigots, mind you…
Though tactically expedient, and perhaps high minded, I believe it’s impossible to try and cast a philosophical or perceptual “cordon sanitaire” between winking citizenists and plain speaking racists, particularly if both have the same overall goal.
In effect, if one believes whites should maintain a majority in any particular country, or one wishes to reduce migration of certain races into certain countries, then one is racist, period. And that’s okay. It may be soon when average whites (and others) don’t disavow, and no longer deny. To answer Opinionator’s question:White Nationalism. It doesn’t dissemble, it doesn’t deflect. It works for European countries (respective of their national tribes, of course). The more it’s a vocalized term, the better. That doesn’t mean that Steve’s citizenism is doomed. The two concepts can easily coexist for now.
He ought to rally them to keep the pressure on Congress.
A basic problem though always with Trump the candidate, and now maybe Trump the President, is handling the basic block and tackle of the job. Maybe Bannon and Miller are these 4th Generation Warfare disruptors or whatever, but the problem is that this is still a big, conservative country with the world's longest-functioning electoral democracy, and that there are a lot of power centers (kind of the point of divided government). Trump can run to the public (or at least his base) every now and then for some extra energy, but if they start to abandon him, disappointed in the job he's doing, they're going to be hard to get back, and nobody else will have his back. I can see the basic logic of doing the hard work (immigration and refugees) early, when he's still got the most strength he's going to have, but the rollout has been very sketchy.
By the way, the Yates situation may be a total violation of attorney ethical obligations on her part. Attorneys working for the government retain similar duties to clients (in their case, the Executive Branch, you can see what the DOJ has to say about ethical responsibilities here: https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/oarm/docs/oarm9.pdf) as do private sector attorneys. Lawyers are not allowed to hang their clients out to dry publicly like this, or otherwise undermine their cases, just because they don't agree with their legal position (if your client is taking a legal position you think isn't what the law is, as a lawyer, you're generally just supposed to quit and keep your mouth shut, at worst). Nobody is much noting this because 1) Trump = evil; and 2) possibly he doesn't have any lawyers around him smart enough to point it out to him. She could though be reported wherever she's a member of the bar. And it would possibly flip the script to "the system won't even follow the law, they're so desperate to stop Trump."Replies: @res
This is really interesting. Thanks. Hopefully someone will take up your idea.
Given the additional ethical constraints on lawyers it sounds like this would make a good test case for all of the organizational resistance Trump is likely to encounter.
How long before LGBT is changed to TLGB?
They do: diversity; multiculturalism; Our values; The Economy.Replies: @Steve Sailer, @guest
I specified an honest one. Not one in code.
The big risk is that these guys don't establish the support with the public, with the civil service, and with Congress that they need to be able to govern. The most important one is the public. The EO debacle has really hurt.Replies: @Thomas, @AnotherDad
Really? I realize the media is all in on trying to delegitimize Trump on this. Open borders–no rights for Americans to have a nation–is a core value for a lot of media folks.
However, out in the nation? Not so sure. Trump’s muslim ban was polling at pretty high numbers–I saw numbers like 70%, with significant Democrat support.
I think the truth is that people–not generally being political or having iSteve commenter reasoning skills–can be “push polled” with memes like “religious tolerance” or “non-discrimination” to react as the establishment wants. But when folks actually think about this–or if they were ever asked with a deep, multiple views, non-biased polling–something like 70 or 80% of folks do *not* want to live around a bunch of muslims and ergo do not want more muslims coming to the US. Not just refugees or from places where ISIS is active, but flat out do not want more muslims. (I.e. outside of the elites and the anti-white ethnic grievance crowd, people actually like living in a Western nation, under Western civilization.)
My guess is the media will whip up the Trump hate with everything they can muster, but if Trump says strong and simply expresses his reasoning and principles he’ll do just fine and in fact will get a popularity boost out of this from being “a man of his word”–with the key word there being perhaps *man*. People actually like leaders who are men, who stand for something and actually lead.
He's been as wrong as whiskey at every turn. You can safely ignore him.
How is Spencer's popping up everywhere on national media during the inauguration weekend--keeping the Nazi and White nationalism and ethnic cleansing memes fresh in the public's mind around an event associated with Trump--supposed to help public perception of Trump?
Can you explain that to us?Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Amasius
Even more disturbing… word on the street is if you look into a mirror and say “Spencer” five times, he’ll suddenly appear and grab yer nuts.
Now don’t go running to a mirror!
Cohen ran against 14 other (mostly black) dems in the primary back in 2006 – black vote was split and the hippie white vote supported him. Since then he’s won the primaries as an incumbent with the support of Pelosi/Obama. The district is probably 75-80% democrat so as long as he wins the primary, he’s in. He’s an embarrassment.
Right. Somehow, Who We Are has come to mean who we aren’t.
I'll note however, that your very question there is precisely why once you give up having a nation with an acknowledged ethnic core and embrace stuff like "color blindness" as your alternative core value, you end up with problems. It really is a slippery slope.
I don't think it's very hard to explain the case intellectually:
-- America is historically an Anglo nation and thrives because of Anglo rule-of-law tradition and more broadly European people and the culture of Western, Christian civilization.
-- To continue to be "America" we want to preserve those characteristics.
-- But under law all citizens are to be treated equally without regard to racial\ethnic background.
But it has proven very hard to actually *keep* walking along that edge without slipping off. Even saying something obvious like "America is nice--prosperous, free--because of white people" would be scandalous even though it's absolutely obvious. Heck, Romney got in trouble for the completely non-arguable point of English heritage.
Now part of the difficulty is because of specific ethnic hostility\activism always pushing politics and culture off that edge. But part of it is because the edge is so darn slick, especially if you are a people--a Christian people--who fundamentally want to be "nice".Replies: @JerryC, @Dave Pinsen
All good points, but obviously inadequate to explain what’s going on now, since countries with “an acknowledged ethnic core” like Germany and Sweden are even more diversity-crazy than the US. The only whites that haven’t gone completely nuts are the former Warsaw Pact countries.
Do you have a dog in that fight?
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-immigration-congress-order-234392
Apparently, the Administration had staffers from the House Judiciary Committee secretly working on the executive order, had them sign Non-Disclosure Agreements, and didn't tell the committee chairman (Bob Goodlatte, R-VA), nor anyone else in Congress about it.
This was a really dumb move. Republicans in Congress are going to take it has having poached their staff, inveigled them to work behind their backs, and then left them with a political hand grenade to deal with with no notice. This was not the way to win friends and influence people among Republicans on the Hill.Replies: @Anonymous, @Jack Hanson
I see you’ve wrung your hands down to nubs.
Hi Boethiusssss.
Its been Doom O’ Clock for opionator since Trump took the lead.
He’s been as wrong as whiskey at every turn. You can safely ignore him.
I will be more careful with my internet blog comments in the future.Replies: @Jack Hanson
Seeing as how you ran to womanly snark, you know that you’re emblematic of the kind of squealing that Kaus and Krikorian engaged in versus letting the Man work.
Too big and strong. They’ll grind our bones to make their bread. Unless Trump plays the Israel card, which would require going along with Israel in something that is currently considered unthinkable.
How is Spencer's popping up everywhere on national media during the inauguration weekend--keeping the Nazi and White nationalism and ethnic cleansing memes fresh in the public's mind around an event associated with Trump--supposed to help public perception of Trump?
Can you explain that to us?Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @Amasius
Trump has his agenda and Spencer has his. Trump “disavowed” Spencer.
What did Richard Spencer ever say that wasn’t true? Why do you insist on doing the enemy’s job for them by attacking him? Why don’t you fire on the real bad people? Why are you so afraid to stand up for your own kind and instead side with suckerpunchers and extorters and shit sprayers and terrorists who want our people wiped off the face of the Earth? Who’s actually suffering ethnic cleansing in this country? Do you think half-measures, non-measures, and appeasement are going to do the trick? Whites are already a minority of children in this country, bro. We’re still on track for issuing one million non-White greencards this year, and the next, and the next, bro.
How do you propose to win this one, bro? Beg the left that wants us dead to “please, please, please let us White people maintain a 51% majority in the country we built! We’re so sorry Richard Spencer raised his glass and said ‘peaceful ethnic cleansing’ instead of ‘population transfer’ that one time. I’m so sorry he existed during the inauguration and got socked in the face and suffered a black eye and hearing loss… clearly he deserved it for being a Nazi! Just like we White people deserve a quasi-homeland… because I’m nice and Richard Spencer is a Nazi! I’m a GoodWhite!”
Do you think you’ll ever win if you let Van Jones and Ta-Nehisi Coates determine what you’re allowed to say? Trump (or anyone else) literally cannot even say the phrase “White people” unless it is in a negative context without being called a Nazi. Things are really bad, dude; we’re getting creamed. Why not take your own side in the argument?
“debacle”
stop. take a deep breath. walk back from the ledge. debacle=complete failure or breakdown.
According to Rasmussen, 57% support a temporary ban on Muslims.
One can hope to engineer a reverse taqiyya strategy where whites peacefully hoodwink the rest and halt the tide into Western lands, but like I said, everyone’s already counting. Trump’s acts in office may staunch the flow, buying a little time, but I think the Overton Window is widening fast in both directions. Whites scared about being lumped in with David Duke/Richard Spencer/Boogeyman du Jour, Esq.—and being called racist—are playing a losing defense.
In this interview (question at 4:20, Bloomberg Politics via WaPo), Trump handled repeated attempted gotcha questions about Duke without flinching or throwing unnamed “white supremacist” supporters under the bus. Trump actually turned his sarcastic repudiation of Duke into a brag about Duke’s praise:
This is not to say Trump actually gives a rat’s ass about David Duke the man. But Trump was/is smart enough to know that a lot of his support comes from at least casually racist ‘deplorables.’ Not all of those racists are unthinking bigots, mind you…
Though tactically expedient, and perhaps high minded, I believe it’s impossible to try and cast a philosophical or perceptual “cordon sanitaire” between winking citizenists and plain speaking racists, particularly if both have the same overall goal.
In effect, if one believes whites should maintain a majority in any particular country, or one wishes to reduce migration of certain races into certain countries, then one is racist, period. And that’s okay. It may be soon when average whites (and others) don’t disavow, and no longer deny. To answer Opinionator’s question:
White Nationalism. It doesn’t dissemble, it doesn’t deflect. It works for European countries (respective of their national tribes, of course). The more it’s a vocalized term, the better. That doesn’t mean that Steve’s citizenism is doomed. The two concepts can easily coexist for now.
Moldbuggerism: noticing lite. Milquetoast noticing.They seem far too aggressive and determined to be sappy, sentimental, dumbasses. And the idea that (((Schumer))) and (((Cohen))) suddenly turn into saps on some issue, well, it's weak tea. Especially when you consider their close relationship to Israel, and her immigration policies.How could we have Jews as the powerhouse of the left, and representing a huge chunk of the political giving in this country (inter alia), without Jews?Replies: @guest
The problem I have with the “Cathedral” (the name, not the concept; the concept is golden) is not its unsemitism. It’s the idea that comparing it to the old Church is supposed to slap me upside the head. Hey, the intellectual class is like priests! Modern democratic socialist-capitalist liberal progressivism (or whatever you call it) is a religion! And its enemies are heretics!
Sounds like conclusions designed to convince normal, PC-brained folks. I’m not surprised whatsoever to find religious roots in the current ruling class ideology, be they Jewish or Unitarian. Only an ignorant lefty could be red-pilled by realizing “OMG, we’re, like, totally ruled by Puritans!”
It just isn’t rhetorically effective on my brain. Richard Dawkins’, maybe.
Not especially. LGBT groups ramping up the anti-white maleism is good for heightening the contradictions though (as is the left’s embrace of Muslims). The UK offers a blueprint for which parts of the coalition of the fringes can be most easily detached: over 50% of gay men voted for the Tories in the last election, along with over 50% of Jews.
Not long, I think some are already doing that.
Sounds like conclusions designed to convince normal, PC-brained folks. I'm not surprised whatsoever to find religious roots in the current ruling class ideology, be they Jewish or Unitarian. Only an ignorant lefty could be red-pilled by realizing "OMG, we're, like, totally ruled by Puritans!"
It just isn't rhetorically effective on my brain. Richard Dawkins', maybe.Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Desiderius
I don’t get Moldbug’s “cathedral” as a name for the very low church Unitarian/United Church of Christ tendency among New England Protestant liberals. There’s a Unitarian church or whatever they call it near me and it’s the least Cathedral looking thing possible. It’s a ranch-style one story wooden house.
That's the idea, anyway. We think we're better than that, but we, too, are ruled by the modern equivalent of a priesthood. We, too, shun badthinkers. We don't think of it that way, but the ruling elite don't just let everyone think as they will. They don't prescribe what to think on pain of torture, either. But they have their ways to enforce conformity. (Soft despotism.)
Hence "Cathedral." Our intellectual elite, which Moldbug would have as the true ruling class, the oligarchs of the modern democracy, enforce mental conformity and rule by proxy just like the Church of the Middle Ages made sure everyone was nice and Catholic.
There's something to it. Notice how important SCOTUS nominations are made out to be every presidential election, and rightly so. Yet every SCOTUS brain, and the whole of the judiciary that makes a difference, is locked up in the Harvard-Yale-Columbia mind prison.
People in favor of restricting unvetted Muslim immigration from places with no functioning or cooperative central government are far outweighed in intensity and money by those who:
A. Want no restrictions whatsoever on mass immigration so they keep their cheap H1-B employees: Microsoft, Zuck/Faceborg, Amazon, Starbucks.
B. As Derb noted, older unattractive White women who want to sleep with young Muslim men (that's the protestors).
C. Status mongering politicians and the media.
These people are intense and have the most money. Ordinary people need to step up and make people feel the pain. Make an example of one judge, one pol, and one business leader.
Howard Schulz is the most vulnerable, so there should be a boycott Starbucks movement and a mass movement of immigration patriots to harass, intimidate, and disrupt Starbucks HQ and make Schulz's family miserable with in-your-face stuff like the Pizza place that suffered for donating to conservative causes or the bakery that got harassed for not making a gay wedding cake.
Lindsay Graham -- why can't we find one man who will allege that Graham raped him and be persuaded to file suit and go public?
The judge -- why can't we harass, protest, intimidate the judge at his home, his work, his family, etc. Have the families of Katie Steinle and Jamil Shaw protest at his/her kids school, spouse's workplace, etc.Replies: @theo the kraut, @Almost Missouri
Don’t forget most of us also have real jobs. The ranks of SJWs are stocked with professional protesters, welfare cases, trust fund babies, divorcees living on alimony, public sector union employees, QuaNGOs, dubiously funded nonprofits, etc.
Why doesn’t Trump show his support for Israel by adopting Israel’s Immigration policies? He can build a huge impassable wall, and only allow people genetically similar to the Founders into America, and displace and remove anyone else by seizing their homes and kicking them out. Lets see them vote against that.
I may have muddled the issue somewhat by bringing the Puritan/Unitarian/liberalism chain into the discussion. They’re both central to Moldbuggery, and they overlap, but they’re not the same. “Cathedral” is the a throwback to the Old Order, in which the intellectual oligarchy more or less was the Church. They kept learning alive through the (so-called) dark age, out of them grew the modern university. They had a stranglehold on respectable opinion, and could even excommunicated kings if they weren’t good little boys.
That’s the idea, anyway. We think we’re better than that, but we, too, are ruled by the modern equivalent of a priesthood. We, too, shun badthinkers. We don’t think of it that way, but the ruling elite don’t just let everyone think as they will. They don’t prescribe what to think on pain of torture, either. But they have their ways to enforce conformity. (Soft despotism.)
Hence “Cathedral.” Our intellectual elite, which Moldbug would have as the true ruling class, the oligarchs of the modern democracy, enforce mental conformity and rule by proxy just like the Church of the Middle Ages made sure everyone was nice and Catholic.
There’s something to it. Notice how important SCOTUS nominations are made out to be every presidential election, and rightly so. Yet every SCOTUS brain, and the whole of the judiciary that makes a difference, is locked up in the Harvard-Yale-Columbia mind prison.
Sounds like conclusions designed to convince normal, PC-brained folks. I'm not surprised whatsoever to find religious roots in the current ruling class ideology, be they Jewish or Unitarian. Only an ignorant lefty could be red-pilled by realizing "OMG, we're, like, totally ruled by Puritans!"
It just isn't rhetorically effective on my brain. Richard Dawkins', maybe.Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Desiderius
His target audience is PC-brained folks.
I'll note however, that your very question there is precisely why once you give up having a nation with an acknowledged ethnic core and embrace stuff like "color blindness" as your alternative core value, you end up with problems. It really is a slippery slope.
I don't think it's very hard to explain the case intellectually:
-- America is historically an Anglo nation and thrives because of Anglo rule-of-law tradition and more broadly European people and the culture of Western, Christian civilization.
-- To continue to be "America" we want to preserve those characteristics.
-- But under law all citizens are to be treated equally without regard to racial\ethnic background.
But it has proven very hard to actually *keep* walking along that edge without slipping off. Even saying something obvious like "America is nice--prosperous, free--because of white people" would be scandalous even though it's absolutely obvious. Heck, Romney got in trouble for the completely non-arguable point of English heritage.
Now part of the difficulty is because of specific ethnic hostility\activism always pushing politics and culture off that edge. But part of it is because the edge is so darn slick, especially if you are a people--a Christian people--who fundamentally want to be "nice".Replies: @JerryC, @Dave Pinsen
Yeah, the problem is what’s obvious may not be acknowledged as such until too late.
Living standards have already started to slip in the U.S.
Of course Japan, Korea and Taiwan have no immigration cultists worshiping the golden calf of immigration, while being as wealthy and spoiled as European derived nations. They know something white people do not.Replies: @anon
Well, the US had folks that worship high immigration in the early 20th century and finally in the 1920’s that ended. So, Trump is able to do what prop 187 didn’t since he is going to hit the employers of illegal immigrants and slowdown legal immigration.
What did Richard Spencer ever say that wasn't true? Why do you insist on doing the enemy's job for them by attacking him? Why don't you fire on the real bad people? Why are you so afraid to stand up for your own kind and instead side with suckerpunchers and extorters and shit sprayers and terrorists who want our people wiped off the face of the Earth? Who's actually suffering ethnic cleansing in this country? Do you think half-measures, non-measures, and appeasement are going to do the trick? Whites are already a minority of children in this country, bro. We're still on track for issuing one million non-White greencards this year, and the next, and the next, bro.
How do you propose to win this one, bro? Beg the left that wants us dead to "please, please, please let us White people maintain a 51% majority in the country we built! We're so sorry Richard Spencer raised his glass and said 'peaceful ethnic cleansing' instead of 'population transfer' that one time. I'm so sorry he existed during the inauguration and got socked in the face and suffered a black eye and hearing loss... clearly he deserved it for being a Nazi! Just like we White people deserve a quasi-homeland... because I'm nice and Richard Spencer is a Nazi! I'm a GoodWhite!"
Do you think you'll ever win if you let Van Jones and Ta-Nehisi Coates determine what you're allowed to say? Trump (or anyone else) literally cannot even say the phrase "White people" unless it is in a negative context without being called a Nazi. Things are really bad, dude; we're getting creamed. Why not take your own side in the argument?Replies: @anon
If immigration is changed, the whites minority is really a myth. Trump can cut off Latinos and Asians and most states will not even looked like Texas which has a lot of Latinos and growing a lot in Asians. In fact Mexicans and Chinese will marry whites more if immigration is cut off. Birth rates are dropping for Mexicans and even Central Americans in their home countries. Mexico is down to 2.0 and Mexicans in the US now are down to 2.0. In fact upper-middle class whites have kids now older than Mexicans.
more white/white Asians marrying. ____ By white Asians I mean the pale Asians of all types
white/white Hispanics marrying
These above two types of miscegenation and race mixing are many times more acceptable to me than America being swamped by mestizo meso-America plus Africans plus the low classes from Asia be they from the sub continent or SE Asia (Vietnamese are mostly OK)
“diversity” and “multiculturalism” are pretty straightforward.
You say that because you’re hip to their consequences. But in both cases you have to jump through a couple of steps of reasoning to get to what they really mean. “White nationalism” is apparent in its meaning. “Multiculturalism” is closer to being apparent than “diversity,” but it doesn’t obviously, automatically scream out “disposes the majority!” You could have more than one culture in a nation and have the majority culture be dominant.
That’s not what multiculturalism wants (actually, it’s monoculturalism in disguise, but that requires even more jumping to get to). But like I said, you have to think about it to get there. You don’t have to think about white nationalism.
If Trump cuts off all legal/illegal immigration and we persist at this for 30 years, our white majority will be preserved plus there will be-
more white/white Asians marrying. ____ By white Asians I mean the pale Asians of all types
white/white Hispanics marrying
These above two types of miscegenation and race mixing are many times more acceptable to me than America being swamped by mestizo meso-America plus Africans plus the low classes from Asia be they from the sub continent or SE Asia (Vietnamese are mostly OK)
Fair enough.
Let’s come up with a better term to rival their own:
Demographic balance?
Demographic stability?
Interesting. Did Eisenhower do that much in his first two weeks? This link implies his first hundred days were underwhelming: http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2016-10-14/the-first-100-days-dont-really-matter-for-presidents
Here are some job approval ratings showing initial vs. 100 days. Should we start a pool on where Trump ends up in this table?
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/100days_approval.php
P.S. Are you referring to Korea? https://100days.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/11/how-to-end-a-war-eisenhowers-way/
Here is his trip to Korea, but that was a few weeks after election, not inauguration: http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/eisenhower-goes-to-korea