Tuesday, February 28, 2017

Most Self-Styled "Conservatives" Aren't Conservatives at all.

The Establishment is globalist. And the idiots who riot in the streets against the Establishment (they think) are globalists, too.

Believe it or not, if we didn't have national governments, but just a worldwide society with open borders, free trade, and other neoliberal nonsense, we'd soon have what would amount to a world government. I used to think that would be a good idea — of course, that was 56 years ago, I was 14, and I'd been reading Stuart Chase [link]. But no, it's not a good idea

Now, the point of this post is that, as the reprint below states, "conservatism," as most people understand it, is as globalist as the liberal establishment. Some of us, of course, recognize that these "conservatives" are actually neocons, and are just another species of liberal/progressives. Because they're all working together, you see. Remember how prominent neocons not too long ago essentially endorsed Hillary over Trump, because she's a committed globalist and Trump seems, at any rate, to be anti-globalist. Just look at the second and third quibcags. Can you imagine any other prominent American politician saying anything like that? Any Clinton or Bush? Nah — that would annoy their globalist masters.

This is from the Paleo-Populist [link]:

Conservatism Has a Globalism Problem


Donald Trump’s success in the GOP primary and general election has highlighted an emerging political dynamic that has long been bubbling under the surface but lacked the prominent spokesman necessary to fundamentally change the conversation. This emerging dynamic is nationalism vs. globalism, and it is not just a phenomenon confined to Trump’s America. It is reflected in the Brexit vote and the resonance of nationalist politicians in Europe like France’s Marine Le Pen. Trump’s success is part of a broader uprising in the Western World against our global elite masters.

This emerging dynamic clearly caught the defenders of the reigning paradigm, both left and right, off guard, and they have struggled with how to respond. I recently asked whether CPAC (which is currently underway in the nation’s capital), as a representative of orthodox movement conservatism, was prepared to grapple with this new reality. As it turns out, I wasn’t the only one who picked up on this tension. David Cowen discusses it here in an article at The American Conservative. Even Ryan Lizza of the liberal Ney Yorker picked up on the conflict, which is saying a lot since liberals notoriously lack nuance when it comes to understanding distinctions on the right.

The subject was discussed in a CPAC panel that included Trump advisor Steve Bannon. Bannon’s comments were apparently well received by Trump supporters as they have been making the rounds on social media.

“We’re a nation with an economy — not an economy just in some global marketplace with open borders, but we are a nation with a culture and a reason for being.”

“They’re corporatist, globalist media that are adamantly opposed — adamantly opposed to an economic nationalist agenda like Donald Trump has.”


But this obvious tension between mainstream conservatism and Trumpian nationalism raises a question.
Why is modern conservatism in tension with nationalism in the first place? The organized right plays on patriotism and the left often portrays the right as a bunch of hyper-patriotic flag waving yahoos. Nationalism would seem to be a natural fit with conservatism. If fact, if there should be any tension on the right, American history suggests it should be in the opposite direction, between regionalism vs. nationalism. I seem to recall from history class that we fought a little war over that matter.

The conflict exists because modern mainstream conservatism is functionally globalist and in many ways is explicitly globalist. The average mainstream conservative voter does not necessarily conceive of himself as a globalist, but the philosophical underpinnings of Establishment approved conservatism is undeniably globalist/universalist and much of the conservative leadership is self-consciously globalist in orientation. For confirmation just check out the Twitter feed of Evan McMullin or Bill Kristol or Eric Garland or any of the other prominent NeverTrumpers who still can’t let it go.

The underlying universalism of what passes for modern conservatism is why supposed conservative spokesmen babble incessantly about “principles” and “values” and abstractions like “liberty” and “freedom” and “democracy,” but don’t seem to be too concerned about the plight of the working class Red voters in Flyover Country who are suffering from the excesses of globalization.

For the globo cons America is not a real blood and soil nation like all others, but a universalist “idea” nation. This conceptualization underlies mainstream conservatism’s historic reluctance to embrace restrictionist immigration policies even though current immigration trends spell demographic doom for the GOP and conservative policies. It also underlies their conceit that the U.S. is somehow uniquely responsible for the security and stability of the entire world.


As I mentioned above, modern conservatism embraces a pretense of patriotism that could be mistaken for nationalism, but it’s not true patriotism when you scratch below the surface. It’s not, “I love my country because it is mine.” It’s, “I love America because she is ‘exceptional’ or ‘essential’ or ‘indispensable.’” The thought of America acting like just another “normal” country frightens the conservative Pooh-Bahs. Their nationalism, such as it is, is less a genuine concern for the wellbeing of their nation and their fellow citizens and more a desire for their country to lead the “free” world, maintain some abstract world order and smite the intransigent holdouts.

The problem for modern conservatism is that this is not conservatism in any meaningful philosophical sense. It’s closer to Jacobinism. What exactly is modern conservatism attempting to conserve or has it conserved? Certainly not the Republic established by the Framers or even the Republic of 1950s America or Reagan’s 1980’s America for that matter. Conservatism is not an ideological attachment to abstractions. It is a desire to conserve something, like a particular place and its people. There are potential excesses of nationalism, but at this moment a renewed and rightly understood nationalism is the necessary corrective to the reigning globalist paradigm that threatens to turn the U.S. into just another third world administrative unit in the grand global economy.
---------------
And if that doesn't convince you, here's Jim Goad on globalism with a pop culture twist from Takimag [link]:

What’s So Bad About Globalism?
As far as I can tell, globalism is a scheme concocted by the rich to destroy the working and middle classes through worldwide financial imperialism.

I have a strong hunch that globalism is also a plot hatched to obliterate indigenous cultures and real human differences under the deceptive ruses of “multiculturalism” and “diversity.”

This is why I’m confused whenever I hear someone say they hate “the rich,” oppose “imperialism,” and support “the working class” while being an unquestioning cheerleader for open borders and global government.

Like Marxism’s pipe dreams about an eventual and irreversible dictatorship of the proletariat, the most seductive hook about globalism is the idea that it’s inevitable. Technology has made us an increasingly interconnected planet, and therefore the only logical and moral thing to do is establish a benevolent global governmental authority with the power to tax and imprison and torture and abuse.

But communism proved to be far from inevitable. After peaking last century, it has retreated from much of the globe. I’d like to think the same is true about the one-world-government schemes that underpin what is cheerily referred to as “globalism.”

I suppose that if you fetishize some dimwitted internationalist abstraction of the global “working class,” globalism may suit your emotional needs and your complicated bourgeois psychological issues regarding “wealth guilt” just fine. But if you support the American working class—and more importantly, if you happen to be a member of the American working class—you’d realize that globalism is your sworn enemy.

Read the rest here:
-------------
Quibcags: The first is a quote from the Goad article at the end of the post, and is illustrated by the girls from K-On! (けいおん! Keion!)  rebooting a Beatles scene. The Second is a quote from Trump's CPAC speech, illustrate by Asuka from Neon Genesis Evangelion (Japanese新世紀エヴァンゲリオン HepburnShin Seiki Evangerion?, literally "Gospel of a New Century"). Number three is illustrated by the Hetalia: Axis Powers (Axis Powers ヘタリア) mascots for Britain and the US. Number four is also illustrated by those two, plus the mascot for Japan. Finally, the last one is illustrated by Ran and Masumi from Detective Conan (Meitantei Conan  名探偵コナ). Conan, AKA Meitantei Conan (名探偵コナン).

Sharia is not a gay system

Well, it appears that Islam is ahead of homosexuality in the education hierarchy. Go here [link] to learn about the latest atrocity.

And if that story has you depressed, here's a more upbeat short video to offset it:

Friday, February 24, 2017

Put YOUR Oxygen Mask on FIRST!

Guest post by Hana Noredi:

Donald Trump's slogan "America First" is appropriate. However much his choice of words reminds one of a particular time in America's history and  the connotations of Lindbergh's speech in Iowa, the idea and sentiment behind "America First" is healthy and logical. 

What does the flight attendant mention in the pre-flight instructions? If use of oxygen masks is deemed necessary PUT YOURS ON FIRST before you begin to help anyone else with theirs. 

Women today talk about self-care. De-stress, put on a masque, get a massage, drink a power shake, take a vacation, turn off your cell phone. Take care of yourself before even beginning to nurture, help. or solve the problems of others.

That is what the Donald is saying. The citizens and government of the United States--we--must pull ourselves together, execute the laws already in place, analyze what needs to be done before we can help out any non-citizen. If that means proclaiming a moratorium on immigration and building a wall to suspend infiltration by unlawful means then so be it.
-----------
Quibcag: Illustrated by a stewardess pic I found randomly on the net.

The Semi-Triumph of the Alt-Right

Well, we won with Trump. Sort of, at least. Oh, the fall of Hillary and Jeb before the Trump juggernaut is a definite win for us. That's two hideous dynasties down and gone, we hope. But is Trump's election a win in itself? I would say yes, almost definitely. Trump has followed through, as much as is possible, with his promises to do something about our idiotic immigration policies, and his implicit promise to restore nationalism.
Nationalism, of course, has been pretty much scorned or denounces outright by every President since Reagan, and our immigration system has been self-destructive since 1965, when Ted Kennedy's bill welcomed everybody on earth to immigrate except Europeans.

But when you win, what happens? Everybody wants on the bandwagon. All the neverTrumpers among the Republicans want to join up somehow with the Trump administration, even as they attempt to undermine its policies. Some, of course, "sincerely" join up, meaning that they put on Trump's policies like a new pair of shoes, ready to discard them when it becomes prudent to do so.

But that's not entirely a bad thing. That's the way political movements work. In 1860, there was a whole spectrum of opinions concerning slavery, emancipation, recolonization, nationalism, federalism, states' rights, etc.  When the war broke out, there were only two positions of note — unionism and secessionism. Right now it's gelling into Trump and anti-Trump. The middle ground is disappearing as its inhabitants move one way or the other.

The danger to us is that Trumpism will be diluted by the same old same old from the Republicans and the faux conservatives among them — McCain and Graham are particularly egregious examples. This would of course diminish the Alt-Right and replace it with the Alt-Lite, which, as Thrasymachus puts it, is just William F. Buckley all over again. Buckleyism of course wrecked conservatism, largely by purging its ranks of some of its most effective thinkers, such as Sam Francis and Joseph Sobran. Pat Buchanan was among the last to be thrown under the bus by Buckley.

And here's what Thrasymachus has to say, from his site here [link]:

The “Alt-Lite” Is Just Buckley All Over Again

A process that is strange on the surface, but totally predictable and understandable if you have seen it before, is the emergence of the “Alt Lite”, as I believe Hunter Wallace has dubbed it, a new political movement that supports Trump, adopts many nationalist positions, but rejects racism, sexism, anti-semitism, and homophobia.
First of all, this is a classic Jewish move. Prominent “Alt Lite” figures are Mike Cernovich and MILO. Jews don’t come up with new ideas and movements, they look for ones that are up and coming and worm their way in and take over. Trump of course did this with nationalism- which who knows may be proof he’s controlled by Jews- and then the Alt Lite did it with Trump specifically, and nationalism more generally.
What this also reflects is the history of the modern conservative movement. Leftism came to power in the US in the 1930’s, and by the 1950’s people were a little sick of it. A strong backlash against cosmopolitan socialism and the control of urban elites, Jewish, Puritan and Quaker, developed.
This kind of thinking had been culturally marginalized since the 30’s as small-minded, provincial, and mean-spirited. Everybody knew that cosmopolitan socialism of one kind or another- Soviet communism in the more benighted places, social democracy in the West- was the way to go. Communists and Western socialists regarded each other as fellow travelers, each believing themselves the senior partner
The Soviet takeover of Eastern Europe however angered a lot of people. They wanted to know why and how communists had such strong influence in the federal government.
TPTB couldn’t really just blow this off, because Soviet rule was far from democratic, and obviously cruel and unjust to all but the most committed. Politicians like Joseph McCarthy and organizations like the John Birch Society demanded to know who the communists were and what they were doing.
As English-speaking society does, this was deflected as a matter of social taste. To ask these questions was framed as being gauche and cruel. A few good-hearted folks may have been involved with the Communist Party years before, but why ruin their lives with reckless accusations? The term “smear” came to be used. All the best people agreed these questions were not to be asked.
Trouble was, as we know from the Venona transcipts, the US government was chock full of communists sympathizers, Party members, and actual Soviet agents. But it was not socially appropriate to say so.
People still wanted to be conservative though, and William F. Buckley came up with a solution. Form a conservative movement free of the cranks, soreheads and conspiracy theorists of the hinterlands and make it an urbane, gentile movement of Manhattan intellectuals.
This movement was still anti-communist, but dropped the idea that anyone in the US was a communist activist. It was still racist, sexist, and homophobic- this was the 50’s, after all- but not anti-semitic, because this was also socially handicapping by that point.
In rapid order, the left defined racism as socially unacceptable- and conservatives dropped it. Then sexism, then homophobia. As we know now, National Review has always been in favor of gay marriage!
If you want to oppose the corrupt system, but don’t want to be one of the weird kids, then the Alt Lite is for you!
Trouble with all this is that racism, sexism, anti-semitism, and homophobia are all true. Any ideology that does not put objective reality first is not going to work. Conservatism crippled itself by wanting to be socially acceptable first, and true second.
The Alt Lite, just like modern mainstream conservatism, is fundamentally just another form of liberalism and as such can’t compete with the real thing. National Review and William F. Buckley conservatism lasted around sixty years, but the Alt Lite isn’t even a movement, it’s just a pose. MILO is gone, and the rest will not last too much longer.
The original is here:
https://deconstructingleftism.wordpress.com/
-------------
Quibcags: The first is not an actual quibcag. We've taken one of Baloo's old cartoons and inserted Pepe into it. Will she kiss the Alt-Right frog, or will she opt instead for the Alt-Lite? The second is a Matt Bailey quote illustrated by Asuka Langley Soryu of Neon Genesis Evangelion (Japanese新世紀エヴァンゲリオン HepburnShin Seiki Evangerion?, literally "Gospel of a New Century"). It is a good description of how and why Trump had so much support from core America. And the James quote in the third describes the other side, that variously calls itself liberal, progressive, and even conservative, sometimes. James' term is the most accurate, of course. It's illustrated by a still from The Girl Who Leapt Through Time (時をかける少女 Toki o Kakeru Shōjo).

Wednesday, February 22, 2017

Is there no end to this man's quibcaggery?

A building without walls! Is there no end to the mental gymnastics of the left?


This one's just for fun. For use when arguing with people on the net about anime. The first illustration is obvious. The second is Ran and Masumi from Detective Conan (Meitantei Conan  名探偵コナ). Conan, AKA Meitantei Conan (名探偵コナン)


A nice one from Stephen W. Browne, who tends to say wise things. And then Karol Traven steps in to seal the deal.  Illustrated by Amy from Gargantia on the Verdurous Planet (翠星のガルガンティア Suisei no Garugantia)


And these three for the same purpose. The first is illustrated by Masumi again, and the Kaito Kid, both from Detective Conan (Meitantei Conan  名探偵コナ). Conan, AKA Meitantei Conan (名探偵コナン), of course.






Found this one on the net. Speaks for itself.

And since I'm in a mood to harass libertarians, who are determined to have no impact on anything or anybody except one another, I did this one, illustrated by a random drawing I found on the net.


And another nice quote. It applies equally to the SJW's you find among liberals, neocons, and libertarians. Illustrated by Maria from Hayate the Combat Butler (ハヤテのごとく! Hayate no Gotoku!).


And another one that applies to the same three factions of SJW. Illustrated by a cute drawing I found on the net.


And here we have one of the most profound insights into why fascists aren't leftists. Illustrated by a fascist girl from the net.


I love this. It's a variation on Nietzsche from the great A. K. Perez. Illustrations seem to be from Fullmetal Alchemist  鋼の錬金術師, Hagane no Renkinjutsushi).


Red Phillips, this time, reminds us that libertarian open-borders advocates are not only self-destructive, but want to destroy the rest of us, too. Illustrated by the gang from Gin Tama (銀魂 Gintama, lit. "Silver Soul").


And Schulman sets everybody straight on how the left operates, and how reliable their assertions are. Found the illustration by googling anime girl communist.




ALERT! ICKY STUFF COMING UP. BUT I COULDN'T COME UP WITH A WAY TO SANITIZE IT. SO SKIP IT IF YOU'RE FASTIDIOUS. IF NOT, FEEL FREE TO USE IT TO SMACK THE SILLY-ASSED FEMINISTS AROUND WHO WELCOME MUSLIM IMMIGRANTS.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X




Progressives and their Agenda

Ah, 'progressives.' No, they're not the same at all as the Progressives of the Progressive Era, like Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, LaFollette and the like. Those guys were practically philosopher kings compared to the current bunch.

Today's progressives are masses of bluepillers [link] led by a bunch of cynical, manipulative types who don't believe a word of the nonsense themselves, but who recognize it as an excellent ideology to keep their followers in line. Stalin, Mao, and Castro spring to mind. And some are much more inept, like Hillary. You might say there are three groups: the followers, who swallow the agenda and narrative whole (Orwell's Proles); the lower cadre, who know that much of the ideology is phony, but they believe it's leading in the right direction (Orwell's Outer Party); and then you have the leaders at the top — the Clinton and Bush families, practically everybody in Congress, and big fat cat capitalists like George Soros (Orwell's Inner Party).

And now, here's a nice speech on the progressives by Stephen W. Browne. Stephen's blog is here:
http://www.stephenwbrowne.com

Saturday, February 18, 2017

Nicholas Stix counterpunches a glibertarian law professor

There are plenty of right-thinking people out there who have criticisms of Trump. Well and good. I might even come up with a few myself, though I'm reluctant to, because every time it looks like Trump has screwed up, it turn out that it was all part of a deeper, cunning plan, and he comes out on top once again.

But nobody in the right-thinking group is calling on Trump to resign. No, that's the province of the enemy, who is panicking at the realization that Trump might not only slow or stop the American left (liberal and neocon) from its march through the institutions, but maybe even actually reverse it. Horrors!

So to hell with those people. They are, make no mistake about it, our enemies and the enemies of America. They desire our destruction — the destruction of our nation, our institutions, and our very bloodline.

Nichola Stix writes about one such scumbag, whom he calls a 'glibertarian,' a very appropriate term, at his site here [link]:

Glibertarian Law Professor Richard Epstein Supports Putsch Against the President, and Calls on President Trump to Resign; I Call on Epstein to Resign!


[Re: “Glibertarian Law Professor Richard Epstein Calls on President Trump to Resign!”]


By Nicholas Stix

On February 13, law professor Richard Epstein called on President Trump to resign. Epstein asserts that,
The nearly four weeks since President Donald Trump’s inauguration have been the most divisive period of American politics since the end of the Second World War. The sharp lines that everyone is drawing in the sand pose a serious threat to the United States. On the one side stand many conservatives and populists who are rejoicing in the Trump victory as the salvation of a nation in decline. On other side sit the committed progressives who are still smarting from an election in which they were trounced in the electoral college, even as Hillary Clinton garnered a clear majority of the popular vote.

[Epstein neglected to mention the Republican Never-Trumpers, to whom he seems to belong.]

As a classical liberal who did not vote for either candidate, I stand in opposition to both groups. And after assessing Trump’s performance during the first month of his presidency, I think it is clear that he ought to resign.
Richard Epstein identifies himself as a “classical liberal.” If only.


Epstein is what I call a glibertarian. He adopts some libertarian (aka classical liberal) positions, while opposing others, based on political correctness.

Race is central to what is wrong, cowardly, and vicious about Epstein.

A true classical liberal/libertarian (CL/L) would be adamantly opposed to all civil rights laws. CL/Ls demand a minimalist state; civil rights laws create a totalitarian state. Epstein supports civil rights laws. I believe that he does this out of the same sort of cowardice that has Ron and Rand Paul claim to be libertarians, while sucking up to black supremacists, even though Epstein has enjoyed lifetime tenure for most of his adult life!
In a similar vein, unconstitutional and illegal affirmative action costs productive citizens (almost all of whom are white) between $700 billion and $1 trillion per year, but you won’t hear Epstein or the Pauls call for its abolition.

The same political correctness has Epstein call on President Trump to resign, while never, to my knowledge having called on his predecessor, the most racist, criminal, and vicious president in American history, to resign. The reason: Again, racial cowardice.


While Richard Epstein, now 76, spent much of his career as a law professor at the University of Chicago Law School, and presently has a sinecure at NYU Law School, he has never taught at the University of Mars Law School. Thus, like everyone else on Earth, he knows that the chaos of the first weeks of the Trump Administration is not of the President’s doing, but of those forces who are undertaking a putsch in progress: The DPUSA, including the John Doe calling himself “Barack Obama,” the leftwing MSM, and seditious moneybags like communist George Soros; some members of the rightwing MSM, e.g., Bill Kristol; the judiciary; the intelligence services (FBI, NSA, etc.), and some Never-Trump GOP pols like John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and former president George W. Bush; and to the degree that they do not belong to the groups cited above, the “deep state.”)

The putsch is an extended version of the conspiracies that sought to deny the President the Republican nomination, and then the White House.
--------
Read the rest here:
http://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2017/02/glibertarian-law-professor-richard_18.html
--------
Quibcags: Number one is illustrated by an Andy Jackson drawing I found on the net. Saluting him is the USA female mascot from Hetalia: Axis Powers (Axis Powers ヘタリア). The second is illustrated by an anime version of Alice I found somewhere on the net. She and her environment there represent the "nonsense" in the quote. The third, illustrated by Ryoga and Ukyo from Ranma ½ (らんま½), who are definitely not getting alone, even if they are both Japanese, reminds us that different kinds of people mostly don't, alas, get along, despite the blather of the "open borders" bluepillers. And the fourth is a good description of leftists in general, illustrated by a neat picture I found on the net. The last, right here, is illustrated by Kagura of Gin Tama (銀魂 Gintama, lit. "Silver Soul") with her umbrella (get it?), and explains "bluepiller." If you don't get "bluepiller," go here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_pill_and_blue_pill

Friday, February 10, 2017

Bob Wallace says what he means and means what he says

You can count on Bob for that, always. And you have knee-jerk liberals and knee-jerk libertarians, and even knee-jerk conservatives, but Bob Wallace is that rare pundit who is a knee-jerk realist.

It's not easy being a realist these days. The MAG (Media, Academia, Government) puts out massive effort 24/7 to convince you that what seems real to you is an illusion and that their narrative, no matter how much the real world contradicts it, is the Truth and the Way.

One of the most idiotic aspects of the MAG's narrative is the equality of man. I'm not talking about the Jeffersonian theory that all men should be equal under the law, i. e., should have equal protection under the law and should have no privileges based on noble or royal birth. No, I'm talking about the liberal/neocon madness that all people have equal capacities and all cultures are equivalent to one another, and one should not be preferred over others.

The latter is practically the opposite of the former. Jefferson called for what amounts to equal opportunity, in that the law should not give anybody a special privilege or a head start. The latter ideology calls for, in effect, equal outcomes, because if everybody is equal in the second sense, unequal outcomes can only be caused by some flaw in the system — usually racism or Islamophobia or bigotry or some trendy mental disease. And the remedy for all that is — drum roll — special privileges and head starts for whichever special group is deemed to have been held back by one of those mental diseases.

And no, rearing the children of those unequal types here in the West doesn't turn them into Westerners. (You can butter a cat and put jelly on it, but it's still a cat.) You end up with what the Media lovingly refer to as "home-grown terrorists." The following is from Bob Wallace's site here [link]:

Completely Alien Mentalities

Some foreigners have mentalities so utterly alien to Americans we will never understand them. These are not people who want to be Americans if only given a chance. Not only are their mentalities alien so is their behavior, and since behavior is a function of those mentalities, we will never understand the behavior.I have mentioned before I once saw a black-white-and-white video shot by an American attack helicopter in Iraq (or more probably Afghanistan – it had to be Afghanistan since the country is so bizarre) in which three men were turning turns screwing a sheep. The other two were walking around patiently waiting their turn while the first was merrily humping away at the sheep. How in the world can an American understand behavior like that?
Now we can say, well, they wouldn’t do that if raised over here. Really? I used to work with a young man from Afghanistan and considered him a screwball. I saw him giving some of the men at work lustful looks. It reminded me of James Michener’s novel about Afghanistan, Caravans, about the ages-old Afghan lust for sodomizing pubescent boys.
Are people John Lockean blank slates? (actually Locke wrote “wax tablet”) or is there some profound genetic influence that comes from inbreeding? I opt for the genetic influence, which is just common sense.
Perhaps 40% to 50% of what we are is genetics.
You can make the argument – and I do, as do others – that culture is an expression of genetics. It’s why Islam or Judaism isn’t for white people, but Christianity is. The former have cultures so alien to the West they’ll never be accepted – and both have caused horrible problems in the West.
Can you imagine a culture 33% Wahabi Muslim, 33% Orthodox Jew, and 33% fundamentalist Christian? All trying to share the same land? It wouldn’t work at all. Imagine the bloodshed and murder – and the totalitarian government necessary to keep some kind of order (think of the former “Yugoslavia” and the genocide that happened after the government fell).
Speaking of government, the lunatics in Dubya Shrub’s administration had no idea what they were doing in their attempts to impose the leftist hallucination of “democracy” on Iraq and Afghanistan. They were trying to impose “American values” on cultures that screw sheep and little boys. It why things are worse over there now than before the U.S. invaded. And they’re not going to get any better until we withdraw completely and let them go back to killing and fucking each other – which is their birthright.
Leftists – who have no sense whatsoever – think there would be no problem. We just have to be “tolerant” since all cultures are “equal.” Everyone else would realize there would be violence and “ethnic cleansing.” It’s been the history of the world.
For a while there was a concept by the historically ignorant about the U.S. being a “propositional nation”: move here and you are an American! This is so appallingly ignorant it’s not worth even commenting on.
I had a friend of mine once tell me he read some articles from the 1920s, in which it was governmental policy to allow only two people a year to emigrate from Afghanistan. They obviously understood things a lot better than people in the U.S. government today.
I also once was walking by a swimming pool at night at an apartment complex when an African woman asked me to walk her by the pool. As I was walking with her I saw a black cat by the diving board. I then knew she was just another stupid superstitious African. I never bothered to ask her what she thought it was going to do to her. Perhaps she thought it was a werecat that was going to turn into a gigantic black tiger.
Less funny was an incredibly ugly Arab woman, dressed in that ridiculous black headgear where only her face showed, who fled from my presence when she saw me walking my 16-pound pug (pugs are the most harmless and comedic of dogs). I knew that Muslims consider dogs unclean, so whenever I saw her I would walk my dog by her to see her flee. I found it a little amusing.
These behaviors are not just cultural. They’re genetic (“What’s bred in the bone will come out in the flesh”).
These are cultures – and genes – we don’t need in the United States. Not any Africans with IQs below 70, or Mexicans with mean IQs of 89, or Muslims with mean IQs or 89. Not to mention all their other horrible, genetically-influenced behaviors.
----------------
Quibcag: I found the illustration for the first one on Zerochan. The second is the Professor and her cat — I think his name is Sakamoto — from Nichijou (日常). As for the third... well, I'm sure you recognize everybody.

Thursday, February 9, 2017

Outlefting the Left

How do leftists behave? Well, they're rude, obnoxious, and they lie about everything. For decades, the right has reacted to the first two by being extra polite and decorous, and to the last by telling the truth. We need to keep that last up — our big advantage over the left is that the truth helps our agenda, while it severely restricts theirs. But we need to rethink those first two.

Being knee-jerk polite by nature, rightists all too easily fall into Mr. Nice Guy mode. I can't get that image out of my head of Romney not knowing quite what to say when Candy Crowley basically called him a liar during his debate. What he should have said was:

"Are you here to moderate this debate, or are you here to assist Obama?"

Or in a more satyrical fashion:

"Tell you what — how about you and I debate, and Obama can moderate?"

Trump would have answered one of those ways. That's why he won. We all got tired of voting for Republicans who couldn't wait to kowtow to Democrats and sell us all out. We liked his counterpunching, and the left is learning that when they're rude, Trump comes back twice as rude.

So you'll never hear me say that Trump should be more "Presidential," meaning that he should let the left push him around. And you'll never hear me say that "we're better than that," again meaning that we should turn the other cheek and let the left do whatever it pleases, while we feebly and apologetically object, and then apologize for objecting.

Here's somebody else who isn't apologetic. Ann Coulter. This is from Vox Day's site [link]:

Immigration is anti-America

Ann Coulter points out the absurdity of the recent Federal court rulings on the God-Emperor's travel ban:
To review:

-- When the president's immigration policy is to promote international communism: The president wins.

-- When the president's immigration policy is to transform America into a different country: The president wins.

-- But when the president's immigration policy is to protect Americans: Some piss-ant judge announces that his authority exceeds that of the president.

This is exactly what I warned you about in Adios, America: The Left's Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole. Nothing Trump does will be met with such massive resistance as his immigration policies.-----------
Read the rest here:
Quibcag: Not really a quibcag. Illustrated by one of Baloo's cartoons about the comically primitive.

Cartoon of the Day

Can anybody read the signature? Great cartoon. Want to give it a link and credit.... And no wonder it confused me. It's half Hebrew and half English. It's Ronny Gordon and here's a link. Both Pookie18 and Perry Glasgow informed me of this.

Monday, February 6, 2017

Yet Another Quibcag Dump

Here's a good one to use when Vlad Tepes the Impaler comes up in conversation on the net, with a good quote from Matt Bailey. 

And use this one to put idiot SJW's in their place who think military people are warmongers. The illustration is from Girls und Panzer (ガールズ&パンツァーGāruzu ando Pantsā).


Here's one to scare SJW's with. Illustration is of Molly Pitcher.


And that's the truth. Applies to all ideologies. Illustration is of Ranma-chan and Kuno Tatewake, who is genuinely stupid, both from Ranma ½ (らんま½) .


This one point out what an idiot Justin Trudeau is. My theory is that Canada elected him just to prove they could find somebody even worse than Obama. Illustration is Kagura of Gin Tama (銀魂 Gintama, lit. "Silver Soul") in one of her fights.


Here's one you can use when the snowflakes start talking about haters on the net. Illustration is the best Star Trek character ever.


And a very nice quote from Paul Kersey of http://stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot.com, illustrated by something I found on the net.




And you know what to do with this one, I'm sure. Illustration is Sensei of  Denkigai no Hon'ya-san (デンキ街の本屋さん?, lit. "The Electric Town's Bookstore").


I had to piece this one together from various illustrations.


Karol Traven gets this one right. Don't know where the illustration came from.


For your use on Facebook and elsewhere.




Finally, a Matt Bailey quote illustrated by Haruhi of The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya (涼宮ハルヒの憂鬱 Suzumiya Haruhi no Yūutsu)