The Uniparty Establishment would like you to forget everything you know and dislike about Joe Biden, because it’s time for the Media propagandists to put lipstick on a pig in a pathetic attempt to repackage him and sell him to you as fresh and attractive.
“Wow, it’s finally Joe Biden’s time.”
No, it’s not. Please stop.
“After nearly five decades of Public Service™️, America’s Lovable Uncle, Joe Biden, might finally get his turn in the White House. What a storybook moment.”
“Biden deserves this after patiently waiting his turn and serving our country so honorably for so long.”
Oh for the love of God. . .
They tried this same shit with Hillary: “It’s finally her turn.”
They preferred you not mention the fact that Hillary was rejected by the voters in 2008 when she originally sought the Presidency. That was supposed to be “her turn,” but she lost embarrassingly to a guy who had only been in the Senate for two years before he ran for President.
She didn’t “wait her turn” at all. She tried to run in 2008 and lost!
The Uniparty is trying to hype these career politicians’ multi-decade campaigns for the White House as sentimental, storybook and inspiring. Get the hell outta here.
No one is mentioning that Joe Biden first ran for President in 1988, or 31 years ago (pictured above). He had to drop out of the race before the first primary vote because he was caught plagiarizing.
2020 is not the culmination of a life of government service for Biden. He hasn’t patiently wait his turn at all; he lost.
But 1988 was not the end of Joe Biden’s presidential ambitions. He tried to run for President again in 2008, this time actually making it to the Iowa Caucus, only to come in a distant 5th place with under 1% of the vote. He promptly dropped out of the race.
Joe Biden 2020, like Hillary 2016, is an absolute fairytale. The only thing different about Joe Biden now from his last failed bid for the White House is his association in liberal/Establishment minds with Obama. And if Obama can’t run, Obama’s former Vice President must be the Next Best Thing, right?
That was basically the thought process for Hillary, too: “Well, if we can’t get Bill again, Hillary’s gotta be the Next Best Thing, right?” The only thing that changed about Hillary between 1992 and 2008 was that her husband was President. Bill’s presidency enabled everything Hillary has done in her political career since 2000, when she was basically handed a Senate seat in New York because of her husband.
Joe Biden is the male Hillary Clinton, the only difference being that Biden got elected to the Senate on his own and not due to who his spouse was. But like Hillary’s perceived legitimacy as a presidential candidate was only due to who her husband was, Biden’s perceived legitimacy for the presidency is 100% a product of the fact that he was Obama’s VP.
Biden: the Next Best Thing nostalgia candidate.
The media narrative on Biden is massively detached from reality.
The thought of Joe Biden finally getting the job he deserves after decades of Public Service™️ doesn’t warm anyone’s heart.
Biden is trying to make it seem like after two terms as Vice President, he was happy to ride off into the sunset of old age as a Dignified Elder Statesman™️ (also a total fairytale given what a loutish, boneheaded creep we all know him to be). But, according to the Uniparty Fairytale, the stoic and revered Biden could not sit idly by while his country was ruled by a Fascist Nazi Usurper, so Biden, reluctantly, decided to run for President in order to save the nation from Trump.
Makes you want to puke, no?
Keep in mind that while Uniparty Propaganda is now trying to depict Biden as a dignified and respected Elder Statesman, this is a man the Onion lampooned for years as a national joke–the Obama Administration’s comic relief; the kooky (77-year-old) uncle who talks out of his ass and gets a little too handsy with younger girls.
It all started in 2009:
Basically the Onion portrayed Biden as a burnout stoner stuck in 1986. This became a running joke on the site for the duration of the Obama Presidency:
The Onion articles were funny because they were kinda believable; that’s what makes a good parody. The underlying idea was that Biden was not to be taken seriously.
But now the Uniparty Media is trying to pretend Biden is this revered and accomplished Public Icon.
It seems like we’ve forgotten almost overnight exactly who Joe Biden truly is.
Hello? This is still the same Joe Biden, people.
Remember when his hairplugs were a running joke? Remember when he himself was a running joke?
It’s the same Joe Biden as ever.
Don’t believe a word of this Biden Fairytale. The reality is he’s the only viable Uniparty Establishment candidate out there, and so he must be brought out of retirement to oust the Outsider in the White House and return things to the Globalist Uniparty Status Quo.
Joe Biden, the 76-year-old six-term Senator and two-term Vice President, is officially running for President in 2020. Polls have him at the top of the heap in the Democratic field, although it remains to be seen whether he’ll maintain his lead once he jumps into the fray.
The Democratic Party has changed quite a bit since Biden’s last election in 2012–it’s more Woke, more Diverse, and more intolerant of old white men than ever. In honor of his announcement, I thought I’d go over some of his best moments–beyond the “Creepy Uncle Joe” stuff–in case they had been forgotten, given that it’s now been seven years since he was last directly involved in an election.
Will the party of Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar accept Biden in light of this stuff? You be the judge.
First, there’s Biden describing Barack Obama in 2008, just as Obama burst on to the scene of American politics and took the nation by storm. Biden used some interesting words to describe Obama:
“I mean you’ve got the first sort of mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean that’s a storybook, man.”
Biden was blown away by the fact that Obama was “articulate, bright, clean and a nice-looking guy” despite being an African American. Wow, just incredible! Who would have thought we’d ever see the day?
Then there was that time in 2008 when Biden said “you cannot go into a 7-11 or a Dunkin’ Donuts without a slight Indian accent.”
He was talking to an Indian guy and bragged that Delaware’s biggest population increase came from Indian immigrants. Biden then proudly proclaimed that, in fact, there were so many Indians in Delaware that you couldn’t even walk into a 7-11 or a Dunkin’ Donuts without a slight Indian accent.
Never let it be said that Joe Biden is not a friend to the Indian-American community.
Then there was that time in the 1990s when Joe Biden said of young black men that we must “take them out of society” because in 15 years, they’re going to be “predators”:
Joe we wont FORGET your words, “ they havent been socialized, they will become the predators. “ Who’s they Biden? Black Men? You’re on a RAMPAGE of LIES, don’t u need to look in the mirror for the 1994 Clinton Crime Bill? $9.7 billion that HURT all Americans including blacks. pic.twitter.com/z9Uy7fXi2A
“Unless we do something about that cadre of young people, tens of thousands of them, born out of wedlock, without parents, without supervision, without any structure, without any conscience developing, because they literally have not been socialized, they literally have not had an opportunity. We should focus on them now, not out of a liberal instinct for love, brotherhood and humanity–although I think those are good instincts–but for simple, pragmatic reasons: if we don’t, they will, or a portion of them will, become the predators 15 years from now. And Madame President, we have predators on our streets, that society has, in part because of its neglect, created.
Again, ti does not mean that because we created them that we do not take them out of society to protect my family and yours from them. They are beyond the pale, many of those people. Beyond the pale. And it’s a sad commentary on society: we have no choice but to take them out of society.”
He doesn’t use the term “black” here but it’s quite obvious who he’s talking about.
Will the Diversity Party like this?
Finally, I don’t know what to make of his 1975 comments opposing de-segregation and busing. Have a look:
“I think the concept of busing … that we are going to integrate people so that they all have the same access and they learn to grow up with one another and all the rest, is a rejection of the whole movement of black pride,” said Biden.Desegregation, he argued, was “a rejection of the entire black awareness concept, where black is beautiful, black culture should be studied; and the cultural awareness of the importance of their own identity, their own individuality.”
In “colorblind,” post-MLK America, Biden’s comments would certainly have been received negatively. The whole ethos from the 1960s until quite recently was to forget about race and treat everyone equally. It was all about being Americans–not white Americans, not African-Americans–and integrating and mixing everyone, because close proximity to one another would automatically erase all racial differences and gaps.
But might Biden’s 1975 have been unintentionally 2019 Woke?
Post-Ferguson, America’s racial activists have done a 180 on the whole idea of promoting a colorblind society and integration. Now, racial differences are to be emphasized and overriding. Black people are to be treated differently because of their race. White people are to be discriminated against because of their race.
So Biden’s comments from back in the 1970s that racial integration would erode black culture might actually be well-received by the Democratic Party of 2019. Nevermind that Biden was probably making the comment cynically and just looking for an ostensibly pro-black excuse to continue the pro-white policy of segregation–Biden was woke before woke was a thing!
“The late Sen. John McCain’s family plans to support former Vice President Joe Biden’s White House bid, backing the Democrat not only in his party’s crowded primary race but also in a general election matchup with President Trump, the Washington Examiner has learned.”
It may seem like ancient history now, but keep in mind: McCain lost to Obama-Biden in the 2008 Presidential election. And now McCain’s family is endorsing the guy who was part of the ticket that denied him the presidency.
That is some serious, serious cuckoldry right there.
Or at least, it would be some serious cuckoldry for a man to die and then, just a few months later, we see his wife and daughter endorsing the guy who beat him in a prior presidential election. But I’m sure the late Senator totally approves of his family formally supporting a Democrat for President.
“A former McCain campaign official with close ties to the family said support for Biden was a given, but they needed to calculate how they could best help the former vice president.”
This is how the Uniparty Establishment rolls. There are no “principles” at all among these Establishment-types. They will happily support a Democrat for President–even a Democrat who was part of a ticket that beat their late father in a prior Presidential election–and not think twice.
The only “principle” they have is taking and retaining power. And right now, power is in the wrong hands–Trump’s. The McCains will support Biden to bring power back into the right hands.
You’d be hard-pressed to find a better example of the Uniparty Ruling Class at work than the McCain family happily supporting Democrat Joe Biden for President in 2020.
“A vegan feminist cafe in Australia that imposed an 18 per cent “gender surcharge” on men and gave women priority seating has closed down.
The Handsome Her cafe, which only opened a few years ago and was located in inner city Melbourne, described itself as “by women, for women”.
The venue attracted headlines in 2017 for challenging the “gender pay gap” (which doesn’t exist) by charging men extra.
At the time, the cafe’s management claimed the attention left them “jam-packed with customers showing their support”.
Note to aspiring business owners: telling half the population their business isn’t wanted probably isn’t a good idea.
“Not anymore. A notice on the cafe’s website says it’s closing for good on April 28.
The cafe attracted numerous negative reviews on Trip Advisor, with one man saying he had to deal with an “aggressive and irate woman” who called him a “vile beast” because he said he was dissatisfied with his meal.”
Why any man would even enter this place is beyond me. You’d have to be the most beaten-down, brainwashed, virtue-signaling beta boy to even consider giving them your business. I can’t even comprehend the thought process of a man who goes into that restaurant: “I feel so guilty for my male privilege, I will willingly pay 18% more for a disgusting vegan meal. I owe it to women.”
The cafe owner (or should I say, former cafe owner) is pictured above, and while she definitely looks the part, I was expecting her to be fatter, uglier, have more piercings, and have her hair dyed some ridiculous shade of blue or purple.
“The death toll in Sri Lanka has soared to 290 after a wave of blasts hit churches and luxury hotels across the country on Sunday.
Police said 24 people had been arrested, but it is not yet known who carried out the attacks.
About 500 people are injured and at least 35 foreigners are among the dead.
The Easter Sunday bombings were the deadliest violence Sri Lanka has witnessed since the end of the country’s civil war in 2009.
A local Islamist group known as National Thowheed Jamath is believed to be behind the attack, said cabinet spokeman Rajitha Senaratne.”
The attacks were not all in one place. They were coordinated and carried out at the same time at multiple sites in the small island nation:
I’m sure we need to wait for a motivation here, because when it’s Islamic Terrorism, the Uniparty “media” demands we wait as long as possible to declare it so.
Christians represent a small minority of the population of Sri Lanka, only about 1.5 million in the nation of 21 million. This is what life is like for Christians all around the world.
US Democrats responded to the anti-Christian terrorist attacks rather oddly. It appears there was a coordinated effort to avoid using the term “Christians” to refer to the victims of the Islamic terrorist attacks.
Instead, prominent Democrats used the term “Easter worshippers” for some reason.
Here’s Devout Christian™ Barack Obama dancing around identifying the victims as Christians:
And Hillary Clinton using the same terminology:
Julian Castro, who is apparently running for President:
The DNC must’ve sent out a memo instructing Democratic politicians to use the phrase “Easter worshippers” instead of “Christians.”
Wouldn’t want to indulge the idea that Christians anywhere on this planet are in any way, shape or forms victims of anything!
Wait a sec. It appears ABC News also got that memo:
It’s almost as if there’s no daylight whatsoever between Democratic Politicians and the US “mainstream media.”
Why did Obama and Clinton refuse to use the word “Christians” to identify the victims in Sri Lanka when they had no problem using the term “Muslims” to correctly identify the victims of the New Zealand Mosque massacre?
Hillary Clinton was even more outspoken than Obama about New Zealand:
“White supremacist terrorists must be condemned by leaders everywhere. Their murderous hatred must be stopped,” says Hillary. Why didn’t she say the same thing about the murderous hatred of Islamic terrorists?
SPOT THE DIFFERENCE
Christchurch: (60 Muslims killed) – condemnation from the entire Muslim world – worldwide rallies – fundraisers – PM of NZ wears a hijab and speaks Arabic – minute of silence marked by Islamic call to prayer
“The pace of this game has accelerated. It used to be that the media would spend a day or two at least noticing that Islamists had murdered a bunch of people again before claiming The Real Crime is any possible hypothetical speculative future side-eye a woman in a hijab might get at Wal-Mart.
Now, they start claiming that Muslims Are the Real Victims here while they’re still gathering up the limbs sheered off of the victims.”
To truly understand what The Uniparty is, you must understand its corporate side. The Uniparty is not just Washington: it is every center of power in this country, as they are all connected and on the same page. They’re all just divisions of the same omnipotent Uniparty.
Multinational megacorporations have consolidated market share and power to an alarming degree over the past four decades and the end result is that they exert ever greater control over our lives. The fewer options we have, the more power the companies have over us.
A consistent theme in most major industries today is that they are dominated by just a handful of multinational megacorporations.
TV is just a few companies: Disney, Comcast, Time Warner, Viacom, CBS and Newscorp.
In 1983, 90% of US media was divided up by 50 companies. Today six companies own 90%. Everything you see on TV comes from one of six major Uniparty corporations.
On top of this, CBS and Viacom are working on a merger, and Time Warner was just bought out by AT&T, meaning a cable provider (AT&T) now owns the content company. Another cable provider, Comcast, already owns a considerable slice of the television market, and now it will be joined by another cable provider in the Big Six (soon to be Big Five).
Entertainment: There used to be the Big Six Studios of Hollywood—Disney, 20th Century Fox, Warner Bros., Paramount, Universal and Sony—but now Disney is taking over 20th Century Fox, so there’s five. Plus, Universal is owned by NBC, which is owned by Comcast.
So Disney is one of the Big Five of television, and also one of the Big Five of Hollywood. Ditto goes for Comcast, Warner Brothers (owned by Time Warner) and Paramount Pictures (owned by Viacom). Only Sony Pictures is not owned by a TV giant.
When I refer to “the entertainment industry” I’m referring to this five-headed oligopoly that owns virtually all of TV and Hollywood. Over the past 40 years, due to mergers and acquisitions, the entire entertainment industry has been consolidated into just five multinational megacorporations.
The point is to concentrate the power of the entertainment industry into as few hands as possible, so as to control the messaging and content closely.
It’s easier than ever to get blackballed in Hollywood today because there are so few places for aspiring actors, directors, writers and producers to go.
In case you were wondering about the music industry, there are now three major record labels: Universal Music Group (owned by French media conglomerate Vivendi), Sony Music, and Warner Music Group (which was spun off by Time Warner in 2011 and is now owned by private conglomerate called Access Industries).
Advertising: four companies, plus one Japanese form, run the advertising/marketing industry.
Why do you think all commercials are basically the same? They’re all about pushing diversity, glorifying feminism, hitting all over whites, and trashing men.
This is because four companies control the advertising and marketing industry.
Internet and Social Media: Google, Facebook, Amazon and maybe Twitter, but only because Twitter is an important site with a lot of visitors, not because Twitter is actually big. Twitter’s market cap is $26 billion, meaning any of the Big Three could buy Twitter and barely even notice.
Online commerce is monopolized by Amazon. Search is monopolized by Google, as well as online video. Facebook owns social networking. Amazon now wields the power of making or breaking an author’s career.
The Silicon Valley oligopoly is probably the most well-known, and that’s because it is the newest and most glamorous. Seemingly overnight these companies went from quirky startups to global behemoths, and they now have more direct power over individual behavior than perhaps any companies in history.
If you run a blog or a page or a YouTube channel that the Uniparty feels is a threat, you will disappear from the internet without a trace. The internet oligopoly can ensure that. Never forget that we can only say what they permit us to say.
Ten companies produce virtually every product you will find in your local supermarket.
You want to boycott Gillette razors? Sure, you can go buy razors from a company owned by Unilever. That’ll show ’em. Just make sure not to shoot yourself in the foot by supporting any other brands owned by Procter & Gamble, Gillette’s parent company, including: Tide, Gain, Dawn, Duracell, OralB, Crest, Pantene, Head & Shoulders, Old Spice, Bounty, Mr. Clean and Febreeze. Stick it to ’em!
Retail Banks: Chances are you bank with one of the four major banks.
Chances are, either JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo and Citigroup has your money.
Chase is now shutting down the accounts of political dissidents. The other three are likely to follow suit, which means you will soon be out of banking options if your political views don’t align with the Uniparty’s.
Back in the old days, banks used to be more local and smaller. Think about it: if you lived in Indiana, how could you store your money in a bank based in San Francisco? The rise of the internet has allowed megabanks to go nationwide. And so the local banks died out and gave way to the banking giant oligopoly.
Big Pharma: How could we forget this one? Perhaps the most insidious of all the major oligopolies in America, Big Pharma is literally poisoning America and making money hand-over-fist in the process.
Big Pharma is global, comprising not just American companies but European ones including Novartis (Swedish), Bayer (German), Roche (Swiss), Teva (Israeli) and GlaxoSmithKline (British). The biggest of all is Johnson & Johnson, an American giant which you’ll recall was also part of the supermarket oligopoly:
“The pharmaceutical industry is becoming an oligopoly due to the staggering costs of developing and marketing new drugs and because of patents that protect new products from competitors. It can cost more than $1 billion to develop a new drug, get it approved by the Food and Drug Administration and bring it to market, according to “Forbes” magazine. With those kind of upfront costs, only a handful of companies including Pfizer, Merck and Novartis, can afford to create and sell new products. The government grants those companies extended patents on their drugs, and these patents protect drug developers from competitors for many years.”
One billion dollars to develop a new drug? Years of patent protection granted by the government in order to monopolize your market? That type of cost doesn’t exactly lend itself to robust competition, does it?
This is all by design: costs are so high because of the need to comply with government regulations, which were in turn written by Big Pharma lobbyists in order to discourage and prevent competition.
After all, if the government wasn’t writing the rules to make things more favorable for the Big Pharma oligopoly, then the $4 billion the industry has spent on lobbying over the past two decades has been a tremendous waste. No other industry spends more on lobbying than Big Pharma.
Insurance: Coming in second to Big Pharma in lobbying spending over the past two decades at $2.7 billion is the insurance industry, specifically healthcare. Already a highly-concentrated industry prior to 2010, the Obamacare law made it an oligopoly:
“Health insurance is a highly regulated industry with a number of government mandates at the state and federal level. The 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act requires insurers to accept more high risk patients as customers and to provide comprehensive coverage to all their customers. Such constraints favor a handful of established companies, such as Humana, Cigna, Aetna and WellPoint. Some observers suspect that companies capable of surviving new legal mandates will evolve into an oligopoly.”
Again, it’s important to note that it’s not just Obamacare that is the problem in health insurance. The industry was already considered “highly concentrated” before 2010.
Today, there are only three states in the US where the top two largest health insurance providers hold less than a 50% market share:
And as you can see, many states’ health insurance markets are outright monopolized–for example in Alabama, Blue Cross Blue Shield has an 83% market share.
“Free market conservatives” think the problem with insurance companies is that they’re too heavily regulated and this drives costs up. But why are they so highly regulated in the first place? Because they lobbied for those regulations to get rid of competition. Who do you think primarily wrote the Obamacare law?
The common theme is further and further concentration of power, in all industries. Fewer players means fewer moving parts, meaning things are easier to control.
Bloomberg shows that the number of public companies has been cut in half over the past 20 years:
Fewer options for the consumer can be a good thing in certain cases–take computer and phone operating systems, for instance–but overall the lack of options usually means consumers are at the mercy of big corporations.
The whole point is power: the more options consumers have, the less power companies have. The fewer options consumers have, the more power the companies have. And right now, the scales are tipped heavily towards the corporations.
This is all by design.
Trump–as a genuine outsider who won the Presidency despite having virtually all the Uniparty’s corporate, media and political interests aligned vehemently against him–must realize that as a billionaire not in thrall to the multinational megacorporations, he is in a unique place to become the great trust-buster of the 21st century.
Trump doesn’t need the corporations to bankroll him. He doesn’t have to be their bitch the way virtually every other politician does. Most politicians go into politics to become rich, but Trump was the other way around, which is why the Uniparty was so opposed to him: they knew they couldn’t bribe and control him. That’s why he was so scary for them. And this puts Trump in a unique position where he can go after these major corporations with little fear of retaliation.
It appears to be the case that in a robust capitalist economy like ours, every century or so the major players reach a point where they attain too much power, and their influence over government regulation (i.e. writing their own rules) means that the economy is no longer functionally capitalist. It happened around the turn of the 20th century with the Robber Barrons, and it’s happening again now.
The problem with capitalism is that in theory it promotes competition, but in reality the companies that comprise the capitalist economy are inherently threatened by competition, and so they seek to crush or absorb their competitors whenever and wherever possible.
Not only that, but companies also seek to influence the government in order to obtain subsidies, favorable regulations and tax breaks. This is the process whereby Big Business and Big Government become one. It wasn’t just Amazon that paid no taxes last year: IBM, General Motors, Netflix, Chevron and US Steel, among dozens more large corporations, also paid no taxes. If you think that’s simply “the free market at work” you have been flat-out brainwashed.
The natural tendency of the capitalist system is toward oligopoly and monopoly, and so every hundred years or so, after most of the industries have become consolidated and oligopolized, and the government fully corrupted by corporate interests, it becomes necessary for some President from outside the corrupt system to come in and break up the party, effectively “resetting” the system back to its original, genuine “free market” state (or as close to it as possible.)
That should be Donald Trump.
But Trump seems to be obsessed with propelling the stock market higher and higher. I don’t know that he’s even considered the idea of becoming a trust-buster. He seems to be hanging his hat on higher corporate profits and higher stock prices. He does not seem to be concerned with the corrosive, oppressive influence of mutinational megacorporations on the American people.
It would be a terrible missed opportunity if Trump does not warm to trust-busting, because right now it’s a major talking point on the Democratic side with Bernie Sanders (the front-runner and, as it stands, likely Democratic nominee) and Elizabeth Warren.
Trust-busting needs to happen one way or another. The problem is that the Democrats who want to do it bring with them so many other problems that are equally as destructive to this country as corporate domination–namely open borders (which the major corporations all want because it equals cheap labor), toxic feminism (which the major corporations also all want because it promotes women in the workforce), nonwhite supremacism, and massive government welfare programs, among many other things.
So it has to be Trump. I hope he senses the stakes of this moment today and fulfills his potential as the 21st century’s great Trust Buster.
This morning Attorney General William Barr held a press conference discussing the findings of the Mueller Report: no collusion, no obstruction (how one can “obstruct justice” when the charges are completely fabricated is still beyond me–unless, of course, that was the point all along). The Mueller Report will be released today with redactions. I give approximately zero f*cks about what the Mueller Report says because there was never any need for the Mueller Investigation in the first place.
If you want to read about Barr’s press conference, I’m sure you can find great takes all over the place. I’ll include this excerpt of Barr’s statement and that’s it:
"Thanks to the special counsel's thorough investigation, we know the Russian operatives who perpetrated these schemes did not have the cooperation of President Trump or the Trump campaign, or the knowing assistance of any other American."
Personally, I couldn’t care less about what was said today because it revealed nothing we haven’t already known for over two years: there was no collusion, there was no obstruction of justice.
I almost didn’t write about this. I’m so tired of all this Russia nonsense. At first I just wanted to be done with this whole saga.
But then I realized: the perpetrators of this great act of treason would like nothing more than for us to simply be done with it. They are hoping and wishing for us to have our little “No Collusion!” celebration today and then move on.
Because then, they’ll be let off the hook. They won’t have to answer for their crimes against this country.
Trump may have gotten his justice today in having his name cleared, but the evil people who concocted this whole scheme have not been brought to justice.
They’re all still running free. They’re fixtures on cable news, they’re writing books, traveling the world, giving paid speeches–they’ve escaped justice.
So no, I’m not “basking in the glory” today.
I’m not enjoying watching CNN have a network-wide meltdown.
This is not a happy day. A plot to overthrow a president has been thwarted–yes, that is a good thing, but we should still be furious that it even happened in this country.
The Uniparty elite have turned us into a third world banana republic.
So their latest plot was foiled–they’re just going to try again sooner or later.
You know what would make me happy? If CNN, on account of being forever discredited due to its conduct the past two years, was taken off the air and disbanded, with its executives tried for treason.
I’ll celebrate when the Deep State overlords like Clapper, Comey, Brennan, Steele, Ohr, Strzok, Obama and all the rest are tried for treason.
Don’t you see the bigger picture here?
There is no accountability for the perpetrators of this great scam. As long as those evil individuals are still free, they will never stop trying to subvert the will of the American people and turn this country into an anti-democratic one-party state.
They spent two years assuring us Trump would be dragged from the White House in handcuffs and thrown in prison. They assured us the President was a Russian asset. They did everything they could to make us believe it, including lying and breaking the law.
And now we’re going to just move on like nothing happened?
There should be hell to pay for every last person that contributed to the Russian Collusion hoax. None of us should be celebrating anything until that happens.
The fabrication and dissemination of the Russian Collusion Hoax is a scandal an order of magnitude greater than Watergate.
Watergate brought down a whole Presidential administration. People went to jail.
We have nothing to celebrate until the evil men and women behind this scandal are brought to justice. A scandal bigger than Watergate requires punishments bigger than those handed out after Watergate.
. . .There comes a time in the life of every brainwashed person where reality collides with their fantasy world and they can no longer persist in their delusions.
I usually try to keep quotations from other articles as brief and to-the-point as possible, but I had to quote this one by Patrick McDermott at great length. It’s very good. The whole premise is that sooner or later, white liberals will wake up and realize the error of their ways simply because the reality of “diversity” will collide head-on with their fantasy world and scare them straight.
The author begins by discussing Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs: towards the bottom are basic, essential and primitive needs like food, water and shelter. Then comes safety and security, followed by love, intimate friendships and belonging; then self-esteem and prestige derived from accomplishments and recognition; and finally self-actualization, which essentially means becoming the best possible version of yourself.
McDermott says that white liberals believe what they believe because it provides them with the higher parts of Maslow’s hierarchy, namely belonging and self-esteem. They feel good about themselves for holding the Morally Righteous Views (as determined by the media and cultural elites), and being liberal is also the easiest way to be accepted and included in American society–you will face no discrimination, no physical threats, no potential loss of employment, no ostracization. You are on the Right Side of History™.
It will only be when white liberals no longer feel safe in this country that they will cease caring about fitting in and feeling good about themselves. Importantly, it will not be (and must not be) right-wing revolutionaries who will make these liberals feel physically unsafe through acts of terror, but in fact the third-world immigrants white liberals rolled out the red carpet for and eagerly encouraged to take over this country:
“Most white liberals will not be convinced by rational arguments, no matter how strong or well-supported those arguments may be. They will only be convinced by threats to their basic safety. This, in turn, points to the real barrier:Most white liberalsdo not feel threatened.
Most of them do not see a civilization that is crumbling around them or a brewing threat on the horizon. They see a thriving economy and a skyrocketing stock market. Yes, race relations are not perfect, but they think those problems will sort themselves out as soon as we solve the challenge of poverty and get rid of Donald Trump. Immigration is beneficial. There are no meaningful differences between people. Trump voters are just suffering from irrational phobias and “white anxiety.” Times are good. What on earth is there to be afraid of?”
White liberals believe all is well and that mass immigration from the third world can continue apace; nothing has changed in their lives, and in fact their lives are better because of all the robust foreign cuisine options now available in their upscale, coastal urban neighborhoods.
White liberals have been brainwashed to believe “Diversity is our strength,” that it will be a good thing when whites are minority in America, that the white race’s history is one of only evil, and that they benefit from “white privilege” and must feel eternally guilty for it.
They haven’t yet experienced the downsides of immigration the way many less affluent whites have. They haven’t had to compete with illegals for jobs. They haven’t been in a hit-and-run car accident with an illegal. They’ve never had a loved one killed by an illegal immigrant.
They haven’t experienced the decrease in the quality of their lives due to “diversity” and mass immigration that so many others have. They don’t know what it’s like to gradually feel more and more unsafe–and out-of-place–in an area they’ve lived their entire lives.
But they inevitably will–in fact, some are already starting to.
Example: At the old site, I wrote last summer that Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez’s victory in the NY-14 Democratic Congressional Primary race over longtime Rep. Joe Crowley (a 50-something white guy) was a loud and clear warning to the white liberals that have run the Democratic Party for five decades-plus: your time is up. The immigrants’ time is now. You no longer run this party.
White Democrats favor endless immigration because immigrants vote overwhelmingly for white Democrats. But the white Democrats never thought the day would come when those immigrants would actually want to hold positions of power, and that this would come at the expense of the white Democrats holding those positions of power. Ocasio-Cortez’s victory over white male Democrat Joe Crowley in NY-14 was the moment it began to dawn on white Democrats: this whole mass immigration thing may not work out so well for us.
Joe Crowley himself realized what was happening: during the campaign against Cortez, he complained that he “couldn’t help that he was born white.” He knew exactly what was going on: his district, majority-white in the 1990s when he was elected, had become more and more “diverse” over the past two decades, and he, Crowley, had become a relic of the past, out of place in his own district. His new nonwhite constituents had no interest in being “represented” by a white guy who had nothing in common with them.
In other words, brown districts don’t want to be represented by white politicians. It has come as a great shock to many a white Democrat that their newly-imported nonwhite constituents don’t want to be ruled by rich white people. The voters of NY-14 looked at Joe Crowley and said, “Why do we need to keep this white guy around?” Ocasio-Cortez’s slogan during the campaign was “It’s time for one of us.”
This is what “bursting the white liberal bubble” means: it means making white liberals bear the full brunt of “diversity” and experience it the way millions of downscale white Americans already have.
It means making white liberals truly understand what diversity means.
“For the average white liberal, strident anti-immigration positions are not just racist, but pointlessly so. According to one poll, 73 percent of Hillary Clinton’s white voters reportedly thought it was racist for white Americans to even have an opinion on immigration.
The sad reality is that few people who are living in a bubble are able to see it until it pops. The rare iconoclasts who are right too soon are usually viewed as social outcasts and misfits.”
“The liberal bubble is about to pop, however. The signs are all around us. The coming awakening of white liberals, which in the United States will probably occur over the next decade, will be primarily due to five factors. The first, instinctual ethnocentrism, affects humans and animals alike and is present in babies. Although such ethnocentrism is not new, it remains centrally important and provides a baseline for the other factors.
The second is growingdirect contact with minorities, which will only increase as the nation continues to change over time. Some academics argue that such contact can improve race relations, but other research has shown that the negativeeffects are stronger. Ongoing white flight in neighborhoods and schools provides the most definitive answer on this question.
A third factor is growing cultural threat. Unlike direct contact, which is lessened by white flight, there is no escaping mass culture. As was noted in a recent Vox article, White Threat in a Browning America:
‘We live in an America where television programs, commercials, and movies are trying to represent a browner country; where Black Panther is a celebrated cultural event and #OscarsSoWhite is a nationally known hashtag; where NFL players kneel during the national anthem to protest police brutality and pressing 1 for English is commonplace.’
This unavoidable onslaught is a constant reminder to America’s white population that their nation is changing. Research hasshown that such messages make them more conservative, view minorities less positively, and feel more attachment to other whites.”
The less white America becomes, the more racially conscious whites will grow. As they begin to feel more and more out-of-place, they will begin to vote accordingly.
“A fourth factor is the growth of explicitly anti-white rhetoric. The idea that “whiteness” is inherently evil and should be abolished originated in academia, but now it is seeping into our broader culture and political discourse. Treating people equally and with decency regardless of their race was once sufficient to avoid the racist label, but now it elicits charges of color-blind racism and implicit bias. Unsurprisingly, research has found that accusations of white privilege can make people feel defensive and resentful. Even white allies are not immune. Black Lives Matter demonstrators protested Bernie Sanders’ candidacy. White feminists were blamed for Trump’s election and criticized for their “white supremacy in heels.”
This one was the most interesting for me:
“The fifth factor, political threat, may be the most important because, unlike the others, it cannot be avoided or ignored. The principal source of this threat is the nation’s changing demographics, which are empowering minorities and shifting the Democratic Party sharply to the left. The effects of this change have been evident in elections throughout the nation this year. These have included the well-publicized primary victory of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in New York, Andrew Gillum in Florida’s Democratic gubernatorial primary, and Stacey Abrams in the Georgia Democratic gubernatorial primary, as well as victories for lesser known candidates in governors’ races in Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, and Maryland.
While many of these candidates lost last November, they are paving the way for likely victories down the road as more states become majority-minority in the lead up to 2045, when the nation as a whole will reach that milestone. These changes, most of which are concentrated in the Democratic Party, can also be expected to shift future Democratic presidential nominees further left.
In other words, future Democratic nominees will be so far to the left they’ll make Hillary, Biden, Obama, John Kerry and Al Gore look like conservatives in comparison. This will scare many white liberals away.
“The reaction of white voters to such hard-left ideological swings is well-established. Two of the most left-leaning presidential nominees in modern history, George McGovern and Walter Mondale, weretrounced at the polls. More recently, moderate Republican gubernatorial candidates have a solid trackrecord of defeating far-left Democrats in deep blue states. What accounts for this? Many white liberals, particularly those with high household incomes, are not as far left as they think.”
Examples: Mitt Romney and Charlie Baker in Massachusetts, Larry Hogan in Maryland, Phil Scott in Vermont–these are the main recent examples of Republicans being seemingly inexplicably elected governor in deep-blue states.
“White liberals may not feel threatened by the left today, particularly with Republicans controlling Congress and Trump dominating the news on a daily basis, but that will change in the coming decade. As the nation changes, the mainstream media and social media companies may try to clamp down on opposing views, but they are unlikely to repress the emerging voices of the far left, who will do far more to open the eyes of white liberals than conservatives ever could. They are our unwitting allies.”
“Useful idiot” was once a term applied by communists to their supporters in the West, but the concept is still applicable today. Every day that someone kneels during the national anthem, calls for abolishing whiteness, or attacks another cherished Western tradition for its roots in “white supremacy” or “institutional racism” is another day that more white people will wake up to the growing threat.
I’ll admit that I never looked at it this way; I never looked at the anthem kneeling and neverending Racism Witch Hunt as potential Red Pill Moments for normal/liberal white people. I just kind of assumed people who were already red-pilled would react negatively and people who were blue-pilled would react exactly the way the media had trained them to react.
But this author is saying that when a Somali Muslim like Ilhan Omar dismisses 9/11 and the 3,000 people killed by Islamic terrorists that day as “some people did something,” that this actually has the effect of Red Pilling previously brainwashed white people. They might see Omar’s remarks and think to themselves, “Wow, I’m all for inclusion and diversity, but I never thought it would result in this shit.”
In other words, the author Patrick McDermott is saying the radical, anti-white “New Left” will inevitably alienate its self-hating, virtue-signaling white allies simply by doing exactly what it is presently doing. White liberals will eventually realize that when nonwhite activists say, “Abolish white people,” they don’t just mean white people in Alabama; they mean white liberals in New York City, too.
So the positive takeaway is that it is inevitable that white liberals will soon experience real diversity as many other white Americans have, and that once this happens, white liberals will undergo major changes in their worldviews and voting patterns out of necessity–their survival instincts will kick in.
But the negative takeaway is that our country might already be too far gone by the time this happens.