God Saves USA !!!
Penang
The USA has a new ruler, a MOOOZLEM RULER !!!
The circle is complete. Satan is at helm !!
God saves us all !!!
Seanis Amazinopoulos
"Penang" <kala...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4ee18a8d-56a9-4837...@w39g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
Sorry, God won't help all the Wingnuts or racist bigots now, as satan is
clearly in the drivers seat. The best thing to do is to just take yourself
out to save being raped by muslims. You know it's the only way, the best
way.
Bye, have a nice trip. :)
kangarooistana
>
> The USA has a new ruler, a MOOOZLEM RULER !!!
> God saves us all !!!
On Nov 5, 2:06 pm, HardySpicer <gyansor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> For having the courage to vote for your first non-psycho president in
> 8 or so years! Also, your first Darky president - I am sure he will do
> well. I expect he will start by pulling out the troops from eye -
> rack! Good for him. Maybe America will once again become a bit
> respected - though it may take some time.
>
> Hardy
HERE HERE
Let me buy ya a beer mate
http://i.treehugger.com/images/2007/5/24/kangaroo%20treehugger.gif
OR TWO
http://eclectech.co.uk/b3ta/drunkkangaroo.jpg
BUGGER IT HAVE ONE MORE ON KANGA
You earned it , thank you very much , you saved the world from Bush's
mad mates , have a whole carton on kanga
http://www.fugly.com/media/IMAGES/Funny/drunk_kangaroo.jpg
PS , Message for ALL YANKS
Enjoy your beer ????
Now pack up ALL your military rubbish and GO HOME
Many thanks again , I am proud of yanks again after 200 years of
endless rape murder pillage and plunder I see a new beginning is
possible
YES YOU CAN
learn to be proud AGAIN
Kanga
======
USA can no longer afford to borrow money to defend Israel OR Destroy
Islam
YANK bases are NOT welcome , close them ALL and learn how to start
behaving like civilized human beings , and ARREST the real terrorists
that created the mess and get on with rebuilding what ever is left of
the USA after Jewish bankers have gutted your country
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_bases
Partial List of United States military bases
(May 2008)
This is a list of United States military bases currently located
around the world. This list is for the sole purpose of identifying
present-day U.S. military institutions and the general locations of
each.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_bases#Ove...
Overseas
Germany
Main article: List of United States Army installations in Germany
* Campbell Barracks, Heidelberg
* Conn Barracks, Ledward Barracks, Schweinfurt
* Vilseck
* Grafenwoehr
* Landstuhl
* Vogelweh
* Patrick Henry Village
* ROB
* Kapaun
* Stuttgart
Italy
* Caserma Ederle, Vicenza
* Camp Darby, Pisa-Livorno
Japan
* Camp Zama, Tokyo
Kuwait
Main article: List of United States Army installations in Kuwait
Kosovo
Main article: List of United States Army installations in Kosovo
Philippines
* Post of Limay
* Post of Manila
South Korea
Main article: List of United States Army installations in South
Korea
Israel
* The USA has an anti-missile system based in Negev desert in
southern Israel which is manned by 120-strong USA army staff.[1]
Overseas
Afghanistan
* Camp Rhino, Registan Desert
* Kandahar International Airport
Cuba
* Marine Corp Detachment, Guantanamo Bay Naval Base
Djibouti
* Marine Corps Security Detachment, Camp Lemonier
Germany
* Camp Panzer Kazerne, Böblingen
Iraq
* Forward Operating Base Abu Ghraib, Abu Ghraib
* Al Asad Air Base, Baghdadi
* Al Taqaddum Air Base, Habbaniya
* Camp Baharia, Fallujah
* Camp Fallujah, Fallujah
* Camp Gannon, Husaybah
* Blue Diamond, Ramadi
* Camp Ramadi, Ramadi
Japan
* Marine Corps Base Camp Smedley D. Butler, Okinawa. Note: these
camps are dispersed throughout Okinawa, but still under the
administration of the SDB complex.
o Camp Courtney
o Camp Foster
o Camp Gonsalves (Jungle Warfare Training Center)
o Camp Hansen
o Camp Kinser
o Camp Lester
o Camp McTureous
o Camp Schwab
* Marine Corps Air Station Futenma, Okinawa
* Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni, Yamaguchi Prefecture
* Camp Fuji, Shizuoka Prefecture
* Yomitan Auxiliary Airfield
Kuwait
* Camp Arifjan, Kuwait City
[edit] United States Navy
Main article: List of United States Navy installations
Overseas
British Indian Ocean Territory
* Diego Garcia
Cuba
* Guantanamo Bay Naval Base
Spain
* Rota Naval Station
Japan
* Fleet Activities Yokosuka
* Fleet Activities Sasebo
* Naval Air Field Atsugi
* Naval Forces Japan, Okinawa
Guam
* Naval Base Guam
Bahrain
* Naval Support Activity Bahrain
* Naval Detachment Dubai
Italy
* Naval Support Activity Naples, 6th fleet/Command Navy Europe
U.S. 6th Fleet
* Naval Air Station Siginella, Sicily
* Naval Support Activity Geata
Greece
* Naval Support Activity Souda Bay
South Korea
* Commander Naval Forces Korea Chinhae, South Korea
michael ellis
So no god to save us.
"Penang" <kala...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4ee18a8d-56a9-4837...@w39g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
rst0wxyz
> There is no satan. Or a god.
>
> So no god to save us.
Obama can!!!
>
> "Penang" <kalamb...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:4ee18a8d-56a9-4837...@w39g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > Dooms day is coming !
>
> > The USA has a new ruler, a MOOOZLEM RULER !!!
>
> > The circle is complete. Satan is at helm !!
>
> > God saves us all !!!- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Clairbear
4051-9c48-5...@a17g2000prm.googlegroups.com:
I like Australians as for the most part the are intelligent, fun loving,
kind people But I guess you are the exception.
Your opinions are not welcome in a group dealing with AMERICAN politics
So why don't just pack up swag and bugger off back to the outback you
wanker> BTW buhbye <PLONK>
Clairbear
$9a6e...@unlimited.newshosting.com:
> There is no satan. Or a God.
>
> So no God to save us.
>
Oh not this whole atheist thing again
I say fell free to believe what you want
You are free to belive there is no God, just as he is free to believe
there is no you
BTW Are you the Michael Ellis from the department store sketch
Clairbear
news:286d9c7a-99f1-4b3c...@j40g2000prh.googlegroups.com:
> On Nov 4, 11:56 pm, "michael ellis" <dvd...@bak.rr.com> wrote:
>> There is no satan. Or a god.
>>
>> So no god to save us.
>
> Obama can!!!
That is a biiger myth than atheists find God to be
But of course you are free to have faith in the Great Leader
The tragedy of balding men with long hair
God has saved us by giving us President Obama. Suck it. :)
Logician
>
> - Show quoted text -
Obama bin Laden.
.the_pc_jellybean!!..
"Logician" <sa...@logicians.com> wrote in message
news:0f5fed67-d1c1-4de6...@w24g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
Obama bin La<SMAK!>
==
Of course you meant to write President Obama.
But getting back to your post...yeah remind me, where *is* that Osama Bin
Laden guy again?
;p
Topaz
No Way Out But Through the Jews
A Review of Paul Gottfried's The Conservative Movement
by Alex Linder
Executive summary: The Jews have taken over the American right, and
they have the money and media access to shut out any contenders.
Meaning: Unless you build a movement that explicitly forbids Jewish
participation and focuses on Jews as the political enemy, you are
destined to be coopted or crushed. Or at least rendered impotent, like
the Old Right, and left broke and fuming on the sidelines. Caveat: The
Internet isn't accounted for in Gottfried's calculus.
...the review
In his 1993 book The Conservative Movement, Jew Paul Gottfried
provides an excellent short history of post-WWII conservatism, and one
that provides a clear, if implicit, message for today's White
nationalist. That message is the title of this review: No way out but
through the Jews. If you plan to pursue the political goal of a
civilized White America, these Jews will be at your throat every step
of the way. So you might as well not kid yourself about that but set
your phaser on "kill" from the start.
Gottfried never comes right out and says it, but the upshot of his
history is that the right has been taken over by Jews. Centered around
the Podhoretz and Kristol families, this Jewish movement pushes an
anti-American ideology. Where George Washington and Thomas Jefferson
advocated no entangling alliances abroad and local rule at home, the
neocons promote a plus-sized managerial state at home, and global
democratic crusades abroad. Since their infiltration in the late
sixties, early seventies, says Gottfried, these Jewish "conservatives"
have garnered the lion's share of money and media access,
marginalizing the traditional right. And although he nowhere mentions
talk radio or the Internet, Gottfried sees virtually no options at the
disposal of those who would usurp the usurpers.
Who are the neoconservatives? Essentially, they are a small group of
East Coast Jewish intellectuals of regular private morality. They are
former reds or red-diaper babies who departed from the New Left when
it started advocating odd sex and communism and other policies they
felt were potentially anti-Semitic. As they emerged from this sixties
morass, they gravitated to the right, where they found allies in the
anti-communist cause; friends with foundation money that could be used
to construct a bulwark against their crazier New Left brethren. Over
the course of the seventies, the Jewish neoconservatives took over one
foundation after another, supplanting the Christian traditionalist
bias of American conservatism with their detailed policy studies and
position papers. These bore proof of their sociological and
statistical cast of mind, different from the Kirkian
religious-literary bias of traditionalists.
By the time of Reagan, they had achieved dominance. Any conservative
hoping to make a career of it, whether in politics or writing or
commentating, had to hew to their specific vision of the America they
wished to conserve if he wished to preserve his own office, air-time
or sheet space. Any vestigial strains of racial feeling or regional
sympathy were anathema to these racist philo-Semitic anti-racists who
are unstinting in their anathematizing of anyone who diverges from
their pluralist, democratic dogmas. Any American, that is. The
dogmatic democratic pluralism disappears when it comes to Israel,
where Semitic chauvinism is, quite rightly they think, the law. What
White racialists want for America is no different from what Jewish
neoconservatives want for Israel. But they will try to shout down
anyone who makes the equation, just ask Joe Sobran. Only Jews have a
right to an ethnostate; democratic pluralism is good enough for the
rest of us. This hypocritical double-standard springs directly from
the gut Jewish feeling that an America made up of many conflicting
groups, riven by cultural standards, divided by ethnicity, history and
behavior, is the America in which the Jew is safest, and can move
about most freely. A strong, sure White nation scares the Jew. So
whether it's America or Europe, he tries to undercut it with
anthropological lies about the unreality of race, falsified histories
("diversity has always been our greatest strength") support for open
immigration, suppression of free speech and the destruction of free
association-all in the name of "civil rights." Neoconservatives are
Jews, no need to look further than that. Jews, whether left or right,
ask only one question: Is it good for the Jews? They hide behind
universalist rhetoric, but their concern is for themselves. And you
can be absolutely sure of this: Their interests are not our
interests..
David Horowitz would be a prime example of an expert deployer of a
plausible, counterfeit theory and history of America to suck in
potential White racialists and get them four-square behind a nutty,
extremist, ahistorical view of politics that can only lead America
into South Africa's pit of horrors. The triumph of individual rights
in Black lands means the triumph of the jungle. It is extremist,
rationalist and counter-historical to elevate a political process over
the character of the people. How can ignorant, 75-IQ blacks produce
civilization protecting the individual rights these neoconservatives
claim to love? Can one-man, one-vote really produce that miracle? Of
course not, and these Jews know it. And they know that the Founders
knew it. So they lie. The truth, as they know and cover up, is that
the Founders understood that only civilized, self-controlled White men
were capable of civilization, and that to expect dissolute, lazy,
TV-drenched slobs mixed with mulattoes and Negroes and Mexicans to
vote in ordered liberty was to expect the impossible. But David
Horowitz, living in Los Angeles, can look out the window and tell you
it's possible. Never underestimate the power of Jewish duplicity in
furthering Jewish self-interest. That's a second corollary to
Gottfried's study.
We asked above whether or not these neoconservative Jews were really
conservative. Perhaps that question isn't important. One point
Gottfried does develop, writing in 1993, is just how little difference
there is in today's political discourse between left and right. As I
write, George W. Bush is battling Al Gore, so the point is hardly
stale. Effectively, the left and right may differ in degree, but
everybody supports a capitalist welfare state and global democracy.
Everybody is "inclusive." Everybody bows before the great God of
Diversity. Are the Jews conservative? In the deeper sense, no. They
are still radicals, intent on spreading their lies about human
fungibility, from which they aone are exempt as the "Chosen" people.
Left or right, they are eager to destroy our White civilization to
further their group interests.
On the second most important political issue of the day-leaving the
borders open to the third world-the Jews speak with one voice: no
patrols. Note this well: Never in American history has a majority of
Whites favored colored immigration. The Jews alone favored it, for
reasons outlined above. Now whose policy is followed today? -- that of
the Jewish minority, which doesn't think like you and I do. You
thought the majority was supposed to prevail in a democracy? Wrong.
Political control in a democracy, as Aristotle observed, is vested in
those who control television. This is part of what certain Americans
are getting at with the 'ZOG' formulation that all the
pseudo-sophisticated college-educated folk laugh at (as TV has taught
them to). The Jews almost to a man push open-borders immigration, and
they denounce anyone who differs as an evil racist/nativist/xenophobe.
All the Jewish lies dovetail intellectually, and all of them advance
Jewish interests. I recommend, I urge, I wish I could force everyone
who hasn't to read Kevin MacDonald's paper on the Jewish influence in
the hundred years of debate preceding the nation-killing 1965
immigration act that opened the floodgates to the third world. The
Jewish hatred of the White world is the story that doesn't make the
news, even as it remakes your neighborhood. I doubt the plush-paunched
Republicans watching TV politics as spectator sport will ever pick up
on it. You will run a long way before you meet an average American
with the slightest historical awareness-nor the interest in developing
one. But the arguments are lying there, exactly as I've presented
them, and perhaps in a crisis people will take a hard look at what
brought us to our current position. For all the disinformation out
there, it's still not too hard to detect the patterns once you have
the facts. . .
So we've seen that Jews claiming themselves "conservatives" but not
all that different from their leftist brethren have come in and
dominated the right. Where does this leave whatever is left of the
non-Jewish right? I would break this set into two subsets: those who
are openly racist (which Gottfried avoids) and those who make veiled
or open Semitically Incorrect arguments while attempting to maintain
their "respectability." The former have no political power, while the
latter are desperate to hang on to their columns and speaking
engagements.
Although there are a handful of Jews pushing standard White-racist
arguments, and who would receive even less notice than they do get if
they weren't Jewish, these same never take into account that Jews can
never simply be another ethnic group assimilated into a purified White
America. The nature and qualities and history of their group shows
just that-they are a group. And since they are a group that recognizes
itself as a group and fights against other groups on that basis-they
must be opposed as a group. This is not so much guilt by association
as guilt by genetics and behavior and history. As a group they have
strategized to destroy the civilized White America they felt
threatened by, and anything we do to them in return is more than
deserved. Treating them as individuals, just like we are, has failed.
The correct path is to treat them as the radical alien outsiders and
eliminate their influence. We need to take their flag off the
courthouse, so to speak.
Getting back to the lesson at the top of the page, Jews have so
strategized their evolution (see Kevin MacDonald's work) as to be
considerably more intelligent than their hosts, with an average IQ of
115, a standard-deviation above the White mean. This intelligence and
their proven historical character combine to ensure Jews will always
be the yeast, the irritants, the makers-uncomfortable, the
revolutionaries. Wherever they exist in White society they will be a
force for disruption. The fact that some can exist as peaceful ethnics
among the White majority does not negate this Big Truth (for if there
can be Big Lies, there can also be Big Truths). Because
class-arguments can be abused, and because injustice will be meted out
to individual non-Whites when we rebuild civilization, the Jews
enforcing their dogma of individualism will always have points to make
that resonate with our myopic right-wing individualists. But just as
surely as these Jews averted their eyes from the general horrors
ensuing in South Africa after their racial-and-political equality
dogmas were enacted, the pro-White right must be louder than ever in
showing that their ethnic Jewish self-interest can only end in the
extinction of the White race. Really. Those are the stakes.
The media neoconservatives can't afford to admit the evidence of the
failure of their dogma in South Africa, rape and murder capital of the
world; rather they redouble their insistence on individualism to evade
the Big Truth that colored demographics and political democracy doom
White minorities everywhere. And taking a global perspective-as we are
all supposed to do, nowadays-the White race is a small minority, and
growing smaller every day. Our White kinsmen are already being
butchered in their homes and driven off their farms in South Africa
and Zimbabwe. Literally tens of millions of Whites have become victims
of violent Black assault in America since the Jew-eased passage of
"Civil Rights" legislation. The Jews well know these facts, and that
is why they avoid reporting them. They hated South Africa when it was
ruled by civilized Whites. They don't give a damn what happens to
Whites once their beloved Negroes are carrying the whip. Foolish,
foolish White man-will you not wake up while there is time?
What we are discussing is a very simple: the Jews are a class fighting
to dominate other classes, just as Benjamin Stein saw in his report on
the TV Weltanschauung, The View from Sunset Boulevard. Jew Stein, like
Jew Michael Levin (Feminism and Freedom), will never name his people
as that class, pointing to "writers and producers," "feminists," and
"neoconservatives." (It is really truly amazing the way that Jews are
able to camouflage their interests, always presenting their specific
goal as a general good, and that their terms are tacitly accepted in
their opponents' rhetoric. It's like we all are under contract to
agree that the Jews aren't a group and don't have any specific
interests and certainly don't work to advance those interests and even
if they do, they aren't in conflict with ours. But notice that on the
flip side, the opposite conditions obtain: Jews always attack their
opponents by class (right-wing Christian extremists, racist haters,
Arabs), lingering lovingly on the specific interests of their
undifferentiated opponents; always forestalling counter-arguments as
"anti-Semitism" driven by the only motive Jews ever allow their
opponents-all together now-"hate." The Jews can only get away with
this clever I-criticize-you-and-you
criticize-that-bag-of-flour-over-there setup because they exert
extraordinary control over television and newspapers. And their backup
line of defense, of course, is to denounce anyone who notices the
strategies behind their tactics as an anti-Semitic conspiracymonger.
This is a second aspect of what the 'ZOG'-minded are pointing to.
Stein is writing about the class of TV writers and producers;
Gottfried is writing about neoconservatives; Levin is writing about
feminists. All of them mean Jews, none of them can afford to say it.
When you become a Jew, it's almost as though you have to sign a sheet
saying you will either avoid mentioning negative Jewish
characteristics or-pace Marx and Freud-reinterpret specific, offensive
Jewish behaviors or patterns as generically human: i.e., repression,
or characteristic of an exploited class. (An excellent book, The
Ordeal of Civility, by John Murray Cuddihy, covers this topic in
depth.) The one thing none of these rightist Jews wants is a civilized
White society where Jews are nonexistent. Or ghettoized. Or looked
down on socially. Or in which you are free to speak and write and talk
about Jews as specific people who act, look and think in generalizable
ways. Jews may be physically ugly duplicitous socialist troublemakers,
but they don't want you saying that. They will propagandize through
the schools and TV until you are practically unable to notice it
because the whole context in which you might make such an observation
has been destroyed. They will make hard to find the few books that
dare discuss it. (Just try finding Cuddihy's book.) History is nothing
but a propaganda tool to them. In living memory they were kept out of
the better hotels and clubs and colleges, and since treatment of the
Jews, to Jews, is the true measure of civilization, any time they were
legally or socially treated as other than the God-sent gift they
present themselves (that is, all history up until about fifty years
ago) must be falsified into Dark Ages (Jews out of power) preceding
today's Enlightened Age (Jews running the show). Let alone the
ghettoes of old Europe, these people are capable of portraying the
fifties in America as some sort of racist hellhole, saved only through
heroic Blacks led by saintly Jews in the name of civil rights or
federal tyranny, if you prefer your descriptions accurate. What is
clear to every Jew seems to be unclear to most White Americans,
especially those on the right who ought to know better:
this is a war of classes, a war for power and dominance between a
small but smart and well-positioned ethnic group and the vast majority
of civilized White people. The Jews instinctively recognize this
battle, feel it in their blood, and are fighting hard for their side.
Most on our side aren't even aware a war is going on.
Gottfried points to two symbolic episodes that show the transfer of
power from the traditional right to the neocons: 1) Rockford's firing
of John Neuhaus, and his subsequent denunciation of traditionalist
racism and anti-Semitism among the Old Right; and, 2) the neocons'
successful defeat of M.E. Bradford, a traditionalist historian, as
head of the National Endowment of Humanity. What was the traditional
right to do? Basically, it retreated, licked its wounds, and looked
about in search of allies and money and media outlets. What has
happened, and this is clearer now than when Gottfried completed the
book, is that the American political system under Clinton has gotten
so corrupt that even average people began to notice. This alone has
strengthened the traditional right's never-too-strong confidence, and
strengthened its new ally, the libertarians, too. And both sides have
benefited hugely from the Internet, which at once strengthens small
groups and somewhat threatens established media institutions. By 2000,
there were enough ganglia of pro-Whites on the Internet to get
mainstream Jewish groups scribbling "hate crimes" model statutes,
anti-gun legislation, and politically correct browser censorware at
top speed.
It might have been expected that the loss of power and funding would
have resulted in the radicalization of the traditional right, at least
to the point of open talk about taking the American right back from
the Jews. There was very little of such talk, none of it open-at least
among those with one eye on "respectability," that ever leftward
moving boundary observed by fools.
What we still see on the right in the year 2000 are leading non-Jewish
right-wing Whites couching what they know to be racial arguments in
regional or race-neutral terms. Sam Francis speaks of Middle American
Revolutionaries. He means Whites, but he's afraid to come out and say
it. Of course, he gets called racist just the same. And he got fired
from the neocon Washington Times just the same. But Jews, to him, are
just people with a different religion, and he can still find a way to
fit minorities into that Middle American revolution.
Then there are the various Southern separatist groups. All are
carefully non-racial. All get accused of being racist. All fail to
draw the correct conclusion. It is amusing in a sick and increasingly
irritating way. Is there nobody left who can think clearly and isn't
afraid to voice his conclusions publicly? No, the Southern Semitically
Correct separatists present as sorry a face as they always do. Always
trying for that elusive respectability, always failing to achieve it,
and always losing the few-and merely symbolic-battles they do engage
in. For people who brag incessantly "on" their heroic Confederate
ancestors, they show little courage and less intelligence.
I'll say it again, a little louder now, so Johnny Reb can hear me:
THERE IS NO WAY OUT BUT THROUGH THE JEWS. IT DOES YOU NO GOOD TO BE OR
PRETEND TO BE NON-RACIST. YOU ARE THREATENED AS A GROUP, BY A GROUP,
AND YOU'D BETTER GET THOSE GROUPS STRAIGHT IN YOUR HEAD TO HAVE ANY
HOPE OF PRESERVING THE LAND AND PEOPLE YOU LOVE.
A little more on the Southern-rights groups. The left always froths
over them, as though people too scared and powerless to say what they
mean openly are going to achieve anything. This frothing is more a
measure of media boredom and the fact that the left is so dominant it
has forgotten what real opposition feels like that it goes overboard.
The left so buys its own frothing demagoguery it can't even realize
these people have ceded the essential point before they even start
arguing. Pity the poor Southern separatist. He can't even keep the
flag in the air or the Blacks from pooping on the statue of his
great-grandaddy. Even with all that Confederate heroism running in his
blood, he's still selling his problem as Northerners, not Blacks. As
though America hasn't been homogenized by TV into one big mall or
airport lobby. As though the guy in Arkansas is worried about the
White man just over the Missouri line, more than the Black next door.
How pitiful and obvious he is, our man of gray, thinking the media
will buy that he's really not racist. He can't see that it doesn't
matter in the slightest if he isn't, and if he is, he's contemptible
for not arguing openly. Ditch the gray and go for black and white,
Southern Man.
How many times does the right have to learn that the media really is
controlled by Jews, by intimidation where not by ownership; that Jews
really are leftist; and that anyone preaching anything remotely
resembling White pride gets treated like a human showing emotion in
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (that is, squawked at and pointed out
to the cops by the aliens who are taking over the planet) - so that he
might as well oppose the Jew's anti-White hatred openly. You can't win
where the other guy defines the terms, sets the labels, interprets the
law. You must oppose him openly, directly, explicitly and give him no
quarter. Why are you always on the defensive? Could it be the same
reason you always lose? Here we come to a deep-lying problem with
conservatism. First of all, nobody's ever satisfactorily defined it. A
branch of that problem is that there is no philosophical basis for
incorporating political attack. A new conservatism must be envisioned
that incorporates not merely the preservation of custom and tradition,
but one that can accommodate formless spiritual or psychic drives that
are even more important than patterned behaviors: questing,
exploration, simple competitiveness. Even blood-lust. What could be
more conservative than blood-lust? But where do you find it among the
Republicans; over at the Jew-intimidated National Review? Among the
foundation-based low-tax remonstrators?
The funny thing is that once you say, Yes, I am a racist. Just like
George Washington. And you are a White-hating Jew-the poison is drawn.
They have set the terms of this political game we all play, and only
by refusing to play do we stand a chance of winning. It is utmost
foolishness, as anybody who has published conservative articles
anywhere in the world will tell you, to try to escape the racist tag.
You can't, and in any case it ain't a meaningful word, people-it's
just a way to smear and discredit you. Fight the smearers and
discrediters directly, refuse to play on their terms. Love and
fairness no more conquer hate than they conquer bullets. Prefixing
your conservative arguments with "I'm not a racist, but..." and
expecting to achieve your political goals is like one of those African
rebel guerillas smearing himself with magical pig grease thinking it
will stop bullets.
Apart from your opinion of the Nazis, consider their tactics. Did they
win-democratically-by adopting the tactics of the respectable American
right, or did they gain converts by their physical courage and their
willingness to confront the Jew-led communists? How much worse can the
Old Right do than it is doing right now? Not much. The mainstream
right-as I write, G.W. Bush and the Republican convention are in full
swing, every other speaker addressing the hall is a colored-has
decided to ape the liberals. In the words of the song, Freedom's just
another word for nothing left to lose. Well, what on earth do the Sam
Francises and Thomas Flemings and the Pat Buchanans have left to lose?
A column in an obscure magazine? A speech to a few dozen like-mindeds?
Is it possible they will turn to effective tactics out of sheer
boredom? Sam Francis (you'll serve as representative here), how could
you possibly do worse than you are doing now by openly criticizing
Jews instead of making pusillanimous attacks on East Coast elitists
and New World Order bureaucrats? How could you possibly fare any worse
by defending the Black-and-White truths of the Founders in
black-and-white terms?
Then you've got the libertarians, trying to get government off our
backs without any recourse to racial explanations or group interests
in explaining human behavior. Trying to understand the world one
person at a time. Some of these libertarians are products of Silicon
Valley, and to the extent they philosophize, they are Randian
individualists. They believe in free trade and free movement of
peoples, and make no distinctions between them. Libertarians seem to
instinctively turn away from any historical recognition of the
circumstances under which the freedoms they demand were actually
realized. Even their few (and in many ways impressive) intellectuals
who are interested in history tend to fall in line with the
politically safe Jewish lie about the non-racial aspect of our
founding, building their future utopias in that tired old,
misunderstood, misrepresented "all men are created equal."
Politically, libertarians are laughable, beyond their useful ability
to supply policy papers. Imagine a whole bunch of computer geeks and
economics professors marching on Washington under the fear-inspiring
banner of "Me!" Now there's an Army even our heroic neo-Confederates
could take! Libertarians maybe never will realize that, again I yell,
BLOOD AND RACE ARE WHAT MOVE PEOPLE, NOT THE RIGHT TO SMOKE DOOBIES
AND BUGGER YOUR BOYFRIEND. NOT EVEN ECONOMICS. Am I really the only
idiot to notice that when Whites ruled America, White people were
free? And that when Jews and Blacks rule America, they're slaves? But
most "right-wing" libertarians would rather support a minimum wage
hike than acknowledge this simple historical fact. They are too
rationalist in temperament, too much like our liberal dictators. Too
in love with their idea of
people-as-individuals-in-the-low-tax-multicultural-utopia-of-tomorrow
to pay attention to street-level political and historical reality.
Many of us want individual liberty, but it only obtains under certain
circumstances. There sure doesn't seem to be much of it around in
these days of "civil rights" for everybody except the people who
created the idea of 'em in the first place. If there's anything that
gives the lie to what passes for "conservatism" these days, it's right
here: Genuine civil rights-association, property, speech,
self-defense-were much better protected in the days before the prating
Jews and their colored parasite minions rose to the fore. Yet
recognition of the race-based nature of practical, effective, genuine
freedom will get you kicked out of the Libertarian party faster than
you can say Don't Do Drugs!
Libertarians take one aspect of looking at the world and inflate it
into the entire cosmos. This is their built-in bias. When you combine
it with their standard right-wing fear of crossing the Semitical
Correctness line, you have a second hurdle between them and racialism.
The conservative Christians share these political flaws. Their concern
is not for the race or the group, but for the salvation of the
individual soul. Of course, since in years past the Good Book has been
used to support virtually every position under the sun including
communism, there is a bit more hope for their conversion on the racial
issue, should the powers that be change. TV Christians have proven
able adopters of the Semitically Correct line. Israel is good and
racialism is bad. That's the message they're getting from New York,
and that's the message Pat Robertson is putting out to rural North
Carolina. The libertarians have their hated parties, but these are
always anonymous "bureaucrats" or "statists," or "socialists"-never
anyone you can actually get your hands on. Same with the Christian
conservatives. They are the equivalent of the libertarians in that the
former are excellent at certain types of economic reasoning (Why We
Should Privatize Trash Collection) while the Christians retain solid
moral and character-development advice. They are both good on the
small-picture stuff. But neither group can take a realistic look at
the general; they are both concerned about saving Heaven or Liberty
one soul at a time. They both simply refuse to make necessary
generalizations.
Christians, again like Libertarians, invariably throw their
opprobrium on carefully generic targets: Atheists, secular humanists
(gays are the one exception, and even here they say "Hate the sinner,
not the sin," as though that doesn't conflict with their doctrine of
free will). A Jew or a black or a Mexican is a vivid image,
immediately recognizable. The abstractions countered by the Christians
and the libertarians are creatures that nobody would recognize on a
public street. They are fighting abstactly against abstractions,
instead of coherently for something concrete.
Never do the Christians go after the Jews who are killing their
doctrines; never do they speak the name of their real enemy despite
the spittingly obscene provocations to which he has subjected them.
This is why, with tens of millions in numerical advantage, the
Christians aren't even masters of the civilization they created. In
fact, much of the leadership class of the Christians has become so
enthralled with Jewish ideas that now the church will bend any which
way the Jews require, whether it's removing the Commandments from the
classroom the way the Jew judge and Jew-created and -run ACLU tell
them to, or rewriting history to avoid the fact that Jews condemned
their own Savior to die (as in the revised [read: Semitically Correct]
Passion Plays)! They may think they are only turning the other cheek,
but self-abasing worms is what these new Christians truly are. This
used to be a religion whose adherents killed others in glorious
crusade for their Truth, and died at the stake before renouncing their
Faith. Today, the biggest name in Christendom hobnobs with nutty
Buddhists and faxes apologies to Jerusalem. For all its residual focus
on humility and self-discipline (welcome antacids to the Jewish public
school lies about self-esteem, which is really self-absorption and
self-worship; in a word, selfishness), the Christian church in America
is today furthering the racial evils that Jewish ideologues,
especially those misappropriating the name conservative, have
subjected us to. Pat Robertson has no problem with those influxing
Mexican chicken-pluckers heaping his collection plates, and has
publicly advocated miscegenation as the long-term solution to our
racial ills. If he preached miscegenation as a sin, as his hardier
forebears did, he would be burned at the stake. Pardon me, I mean, he
wouldn't be on TV. The fact that any evangelicals are on TV at all is
conditioned on their support for Israel and their multiracialism. This
is what makes their leaders despicable-not the hypocrisy and
White-trashiness the left and right would have us sneer at them for.
Recently Bush's first national campaign ad aired. It shows him at a
school surrounded by little black and brown kids, all well on their
way to becoming the computer programmers and doctors and lawyers and
Republicans of tomorrow. It seems the GOP has made up its mind which
way it's going. It's everyvato's party; down with the homies, too.
Make any show that persuades in order to capture power. The old
Clinton strategy. After all, reality is that waves of wets wash over
the border every night, and at some point they and their kids will
vote. The bulk White population is fading, and the core demographic
supporting conservative principles simply won't be there to swing a
presidential election in another ten years.
Even Jew-genuflecting National Review has noticed this Californication
of America, as has been termed in a different context. But sucking up
to the powers that be, angling for a spot, doing what he's told, is
something the middle-manager mind that makes up the Republican ranks
well understands. Ya got to roll with the punches, ya know?
White man, you have to decide. If you choose not to decide, you still
have made a choice, to make a phrase. You can pull a Christian
Scientist, and pretend that that brown spot on our national chest will
just go away if we think positive thoughts long enough, refuse to
acknowledge it. But it won't. Those coloreds swamping the border,
those grasping welfare niggers, those lying Jewish press manipulators
won't disappear of their own accord. Twenty years from now, George
Bush-Brown will be president, and all the things you fear today-
your kids blood-libeled at school; yourself discriminated against on
the job; your taxes higher than ever; your wife subject to insults,
rape or assault; your big cities gang-dominated; your small cities
dominated by nigger "music" and clothing pollution; your guns
outlawed; your political opinions criminalized; your TV louder and
more intrusive and hateful-will be worse. As Paul Gottfried shows,
but doesn't tell, the same Jews that have made the present possible
are working hard to make this future inevitable. But there is still a
window of opportunity. But only if you recognize that we-you and I
and the others reading this-are part of the White race, share
interests, and must band together. And that, politically, culturally
and socially, to achieve a civilized future, there is
NO WAY OUT BUT THROUGH THE JEWS!
http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/v1/index5.htm
http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com
rst0wxyz
> rst0wxyz <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote innews:286d9c7a-99f1-4b3c...@j40g2000prh.googlegroups.com:
>
> > On Nov 4, 11:56 pm, "michael ellis" <dvd...@bak.rr.com> wrote:
> >> There is no satan. Or a god.
>
> >> So no god to save us.
>
> > Obama can!!!
>
> That is a biiger myth than atheists find God to be
> But of course you are free to have faith in the Great Leader
President-elect Obama said:
"Yes, we can".
_ G O D _
news:49113804$0$4454$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
Speak for yourself... I always help those who help themselves.
But those who don't agree with me can eat shit and die ASAP...
--
_____________________________________________________
I intend to last long enough to put out of business all COck-suckers
and other beneficiaries of the institutionalized slavery and genocide.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The army that will defeat terrorism doesn't wear uniforms, or drive
Humvees, or calls in air-strikes. It doesn't have a high command, or
high security, or a high budget. The army that can defeat terrorism
does battle quietly, clearing minefields and vaccinating children. It
undermines military dictatorships and military lobbyists. It subverts
sweatshops and special interests.Where people feel powerless, it
helps them organize for change, and where people are powerful, it
reminds them of their responsibility." ~~~~ Author Unknown ~~~~
___________________________________________________
--
Clairbear
news:95094e5a-0dea-49eb...@d36g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
> On Nov 5, 2:28 am, Clairbear <cl...@Verizon.net> wrote:
>> rst0wxyz <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote
>> innews:286d9c7a-99f1-4b3c-84a4-ff6e44
> f18...@j40g2000prh.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > On Nov 4, 11:56 pm, "michael ellis" <dvd...@bak.rr.com> wrote:
>> >> There is no satan. Or a god.
>>
>> >> So no god to save us.
>>
>> > Obama can!!!
>>
>> That is a biiger myth than atheists find God to be
>> But of course you are free to have faith in the Great Leader
>
> President-elect Obama said:
>
> "Yes, we can".
just another empty slogan to dupe folks like you
but don't wory both sides do it
rst0wxyz
> rst0wxyz <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote innews:95094e5a-0dea-49eb...@d36g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 5, 2:28 am, Clairbear <cl...@Verizon.net> wrote:
> >> rst0wxyz <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote
> >> innews:286d9c7a-99f1-4b3c-84a4-ff6e44
> > f18...@j40g2000prh.googlegroups.com:
>
> >> > On Nov 4, 11:56 pm, "michael ellis" <dvd...@bak.rr.com> wrote:
> >> >> There is no satan. Or a god.
>
> >> >> So no god to save us.
>
> >> > Obama can!!!
>
> >> That is a biiger myth than atheists find God to be
> >> But of course you are free to have faith in the Great Leader
>
> > President-elect Obama said:
>
> > "Yes, we can".
>
> just another empty slogan to dupe folks like you
A failure in life, huh? No wonder!!! You don't give yourself a chance.
> but don't wory both sides do it,
But Obama said:
"Yes, we can".
Give yourself a chance in life!!!
rst0wxyz
> On Nov 5, 9:25 am, rst0wxyz <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 4, 11:56 pm, "michael ellis" <dvd...@bak.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
> Obama bin Laden.
You can't spell, can you? It's Osama bin Laden.
Clairbear
news:9a5801a1-358b-4439...@c22g2000prc.googlegroups.com:
> On Nov 5, 9:02 am, Clairbear <cl...@Verizon.net> wrote:
>> rst0wxyz <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote
>> innews:95094e5a-0dea-49eb-aca0-564fa6
> 35b...@d36g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Nov 5, 2:28 am, Clairbear <cl...@Verizon.net> wrote:
>> >> rst0wxyz <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote
>> >> innews:286d9c7a-99f1-4b3c-84a4-ff6e44
>> > f18...@j40g2000prh.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> >> > On Nov 4, 11:56 pm, "michael ellis" <dvd...@bak.rr.com> wrote:
>> >> >> There is no satan. Or a god.
>>
>> >> >> So no god to save us.
>>
>> >> > Obama can!!!
>>
>> >> That is a biiger myth than atheists find God to be
>> >> But of course you are free to have faith in the Great Leader
>>
>> > President-elect Obama said:
>>
>> > "Yes, we can".
>>
>> just another empty slogan to dupe folks like you
>
> A failure in life, huh? No wonder!!! You don't give yourself a chance.
>
>> but don't wory both sides do it,
>
> But Obama said:
>
> "Yes, we can".
>
> Give yourself a chance in life!!!
>
You should rent your self out ass a parrot
All you do is repeat the the same slogan
I have a life and it does not revolve around meanless slogans
Of course now Obama needs to prove he is worthy of the office which a 4 or
five percent margin gave him.
rst0wxyz
> rst0wxyz <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote innews:9a5801a1-358b-4439...@c22g2000prc.googlegroups.com:
>
> > On Nov 5, 9:02 am, Clairbear <cl...@Verizon.net> wrote:
> > A failure in life, huh? No wonder!!! You don't give yourself a chance.
>
>
> > "Yes, we can".
>
> > Give yourself a chance in life!!!
>
> You should rent your self out ass a parrot
Are you in a market for a nasty parrot? I have just the one for you.
He is called "ugly filthy smelly chicken shit liar half-wit monkey
see, monkey do ignorant fool abum_chump". You can have him for a
song.
> All you do is repeat the the same slogan
Slogan? what slogan? Chairman Mao Zedong died about 30 years ago. The
slogans died with him.
> I have a life
You have a life? What kind of life do you have? low-life?
> and it does not revolve around meanless slogans
Don't you know? Slogans make the world goes 'round and 'round!!!
>
> Of course now Obama needs to prove he is worthy of the office which a 4 or
> five percent margin gave him.
Well, let's roll up our sleeves and start working on it. He can't do
it by himself, you know.
Clairbear
news:e0e1a6a4-c4b7-4d5b...@r37g2000prr.googlegroups.com:
> On Nov 5, 10:23 am, Clairbear <cl...@Verizon.net> wrote:
>> rst0wxyz <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote
>> innews:9a5801a1-358b-4439-be06-5535b0
> f32...@c22g2000prc.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > On Nov 5, 9:02 am, Clairbear <cl...@Verizon.net> wrote:
>> > A failure in life, huh? No wonder!!! You don't give yourself a
>> > chance.
>>
>> > But Obama said:
>>
>> > "Yes, we can".
>>
>> > Give yourself a chance in life!!!
>>
>> You should rent your self out ass a parrot
>
> Are you in a market for a nasty parrot? I have just the one for you.
> He is called "ugly filthy smelly chicken shit liar half-wit monkey
> see, monkey do ignorant fool ". You can have him for a
> song.
You should not be so hard on youself. I doubt you are truly an"abum_chump"
What ever it is
>> All you do is repeat the the same slogan
>
> Slogan? what slogan? Chairman Mao Zedong died about 30 years ago. The
> slogans died with him.
Slogans like "yes we can" or "change we need"
Yes we can what? What is the change? Oh yeah turn the clock back to higher
taxes and bigger government
What is really scary is this cult of personality that the Obamites are
buying into Things like those creepy singing Obama kids videos
and fool like Charlie Rangel sound like a N Korean speaking about the great
leader:
RANGEL: On Tuesday we'll be able to say, who's been able to bring to us one
of the greatest Presidents we will ever see, Barack Obama. Who are we going
to elect? Barack Obama. Who's the next President? Barack Obama. Who is our
hero? Barack Obama. Who is going to lead us out of poverty? Barack Obama.
Who is going to save the United States of America? Barack Obama. Who is
going to save the entire world? Barack Obama. And who do we love? Barack
Obama. God bless.
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/196/17711/
>> I have a life
>
> You have a life? What kind of life do you have? low-life?
You do not know me, punk!
>> and it does not revolve around meanless slogans
>
> Don't you know? Slogans make the world goes 'round and 'round!!!
There are lots of slogan and most especial poltical ones mean NOTHING
rst0wxyz
> rst0wxyz <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote innews:e0e1a6a4-c4b7-4d5b...@r37g2000prr.googlegroups.com:
>
> > On Nov 5, 10:23 am, Clairbear <cl...@Verizon.net> wrote:
> > Are you in a market for a nasty parrot? I have just the one for you.
> > He is called "ugly filthy smelly chicken shit liar half-wit monkey
> > see, monkey do ignorant fool ". You can have him for a
> > song.
>
> You should not be so hard on youself. I doubt you are truly an"abum_chump"
> What ever it is
If you don't know what you are talking about, you should shut up.
>> All you do is repeat the the same slogan
>
> > Slogan? what slogan? Chairman Mao Zedong died about 30 years ago. The
> > slogans died with him.
>
> Slogans like "yes we can"
You gotta believe in yourself, kido!!!
>or "change we need"
Yes, we surely need change, a lot of changes.
> Yes we can what?
Boy!!! are you dumb!!! You can't even complete a sentence.
Yes, we can do it.
> What is the change?
Dum-dum. You need to go to school. How did you ever live in this
world the way you are?
The change of direction which the country is going.
> Oh yeah turn the clock back to higher
> taxes and bigger government
You can't beat the Bush Administration on these as the country has
piled up trillions in debt to other countries.
> What is really scary is this cult of personality that the Obamites are
> buying into Things like those creepy singing Obama kids videos
> and fool like Charlie Rangel sound like a N Korean speaking about the great
> leader:
> RANGEL: On Tuesday we'll be able to say, who's been able to bring to us one
> of the greatest Presidents we will ever see, Barack Obama. Who are we going
> to elect? Barack Obama. Who's the next President? Barack Obama. Who is our
> hero? Barack Obama. Who is going to lead us out of poverty? Barack Obama.
> Who is going to save the United States of America? Barack Obama. Who is
> going to save the entire world? Barack Obama. And who do we love? Barack
> Obama. God bless.http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/196/17711/>> I have a life
>
Still, a racist among us!!! what a shame!!! Gotta do a little brain-
washing. You are still living in the pre-1950s.
> > You have a life? What kind of life do you have? low-life?
>
> You do not know me, punk!
I now know you are a racist.
>> and it does not revolve around meanless slogans
>
> > Don't you know? Slogans make the world goes 'round and 'round!!!
>
> There are lots of slogan and most especial poltical ones mean NOTHING
Yes, yes, but slogans are supposed to get you off your butt and do
something, you ass-hole.
Morton Davis
"Judge Piglet" <pon...@uscb.edu> wrote in message
news:t5d2h4pdiacub62fn...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 21:28:26 -0800 (PST), Penang <kala...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Dooms day is coming !
>>
>>The USA has a new ruler, a MOOOZLEM RULER !!!
>>
>>The circle is complete. Satan is at helm !!
>>
>>God saves us all !!!
>
>
No, he's a SOCIALIST who broke his pledge to accept public financing.
Clairbear
news:4500b230-06de-45ee...@q26g2000prq.googlegroups.com:
> On Nov 5, 11:24 am, Clairbear <cl...@Verizon.net> wrote:
>> rst0wxyz <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote
>> innews:e0e1a6a4-c4b7-4d5b-b004-e899f3
> 071...@r37g2000prr.googlegroups.com:
Since when is exposiong the truth in the light of day racist?
Get you self a dictionary an look up the word racist as you obviously
do not know what it means,
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/racism
While you art it read up on cult of personality
A cult of personality or personality cult arises when a country's leader
uses mass media to create a heroic public image through unquestioning
flattery and praise. Cults of personality are often found in
dictatorships.
A cult of personality is similar to general hero worship except that it
is created specifically for political leaders. However, the term may be
applied by analogy to refer to adulation of religious or non-political
leaders.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_personality
>> > You have a life? What kind of life do you have? low-life?
>>
>> You do not know me, punk!
>
> I now know you are a racist.
>
You are obvious too stupid to get that we as a nation have been taken by
clever slogan and briliant stump speaker
If you think it is about race the you are dumber tha I gave you credit
for
John Graeme
> On Nov 5, 11:24 am, Clairbear <cl...@Verizon.net> wrote:
> > rst0wxyz <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote innews:e0e1a6a4-c4b7-4d5b...@r37g2000prr.googlegroups.com:
> > > On Nov 5, 10:23 am, Clairbear <cl...@Verizon.net> wrote:
> >> All you do is repeat the the same slogan
>
> > > Slogan? what slogan? Chairman Mao Zedong died about 30 years ago. The
> > > slogans died with him.
>
> > Slogans like "yes we can"
>
> You gotta believe in yourself, kido!!!
>
> >or "change we need"
>
> Yes, we surely need change, a lot of changes.
>
> > What is the change?
Are you really that naïve? You really believe all those promises of
change, and all the other goodies politicians promise? We hear the
same BS every few years. Politicians will say anything to get
elected. They rely on PT Barnum's old dictum that there's a sucker
born every minute.
Jesus Christ the Holy Cunt Fucker
http://www.prisonplanet.com/obamas-first-appointment-is-son-of-zionist-terrorist.html
Penang
> While you art it read up on cult of personality
> A cult of personality or personality cult arises when a country's leader
> uses mass media to create a heroic public image through unquestioning
> flattery and praise. Cults of personality are often found in
> dictatorships.
> A cult of personality is similar to general hero worship except that it
> is created specifically for political leaders. However, the term may be
> applied by analogy to refer to adulation of religious or non-political
>
> >> > You have a life? What kind of life do you have? low-life?
>
> >> You do not know me, punk!
>
> > I now know you are a racist.
>
> You are obvious too stupid to get that we as a nation have been taken by
> clever slogan and briliant stump speaker
> If you think it is about race the you are dumber tha I gave you credit
> for
Methinks you are talking to a typical oba(yes we can)mites.
Whenever they ran out of argument, they would accuse you to be a
racist.
God Save Us All !!!
Penang
What do you call a guy who bought into the "Yes, We Can" slogan
without even using his brain?
Obamites !
Be careful. Be extra careful.
They do not argue with facts. All they know is accusing others
disagreeing with them "RACIST" !
That's all.
Clairbear
news:fbd8ace8-6686-44ad...@t39g2000prh.googlegroups.com:
> On Nov 6, 8:07 am, Clairbear <cl...@Verizon.net> wrote:
>> rst0wxyz <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote
>> innews:4500b230-06de-45ee-8e27-6dbba10dfdb9
@q26g2000prq.googlegroups.c
>> om:
So many on the left have turned the election into a referendum on race.
Iwonder just how many voted for obama out of fear of being branded
racist, The thing that really gets me is how Obama had insulted working
blue collar Americans with his remarks about bible and gun carrying
angry rednecks as well as that idiot Murtha calling his constituents
racist and rednecks, yet they still vote for them. We live in a land of
sheep. I firmly believe the bandwagon effect also contributed to Obama
as there are a cetain percentage of people who will vote for the who the
polls say the winner will be just because the want to be on the winning
sides. After all howmany people do you know wh became Cowboys or Steeler
fans when they were winning and now sport their Tom Brady jerseys. It is
the same with politics.
pg
When electing a president that will steer the country for the next 4
years turning into a freak show, what hope is left?
rst0wxyz
We had 8 years of one-man-freak-show. Anything is refreshing and
entertaining than the last 8.
pg
Hey, you said that.
You had 8 years of freak show, why adding to the suffering by yet
another 4 years of shit?
Jesus Christ the Holy Cunt Fucker
God cannot save Himself , let alone USA .
I ought to know . I am Jesus Christ , the Holy fucker .
Nov 8, 12:06 am, Clairbear <cl...@Verizon.net> wrote:
> >> means,http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/racismWhile you art it
> the same with politics.- Hide quoted text -
Mr smiley happy sock puppet
> Dooms day is coming !
>
> The USA has a new ruler, a MOOOZLEM RULER !!!
>
> The circle is complete. Satan is at helm !!
>
> God saves us all !!!
If there is a god, and he or she is in the mood to save America, he or
she would do so by putting the Democrats in power. Maybe god did save
us. :)
rst0wxyz
Didn't you hear the resounding "change" the voters wanted? Obama
can!!!
Doc Holliday
> Dooms day is coming !
>
> The USA has a new ruler, a MOOOZLEM RULER !!!
>
> The circle is complete. Satan is at helm !!
>
> God saves us all !!!
Choosing to Know
By Ronald Aronson http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/articleprint.php?num=359
The fact that nearly half of all Americans reject evolution is
depressing enough, but the opinions of college graduates may cause
despair. One in three holders of bachelor’s and postgraduate degrees
deny that “Darwin’s theory of evolution [is] proved by fossil
evidence.” Even more dismal, only about one-third of U.S. college
graduates and postgraduates admit to a “belief in evolution”—while
about sixty percent accept Creationism or its Trojan Horse,
Intelligent Design.[1] In over thirty countries, including every other
advanced society, a higher percentage of the general population
accepts evolution: in pious Ireland, for example, the number accepting
evolution is sixty percent higher than in the U.S.! Americans are just
as likely to choose to believe in ghosts and UFOs as Creationism, and
only somewhat less likely to believe in witches and astrology.[2]
Three-quarters of Americans admit to at least one “weird belief,” to
use Michael Shermer’s apt phrase, including clairvoyance (26%), ESP
(41%), telepathy (31%), and communication with the dead (21%).[3]
Was the Enlightenment overly optimistic to express confidence in
ordinary people’s ability to make sense of their lives and the world?
This was once, after all, a radical claim about human capacities.
Immanuel Kant proclaimed: “Dare to know! ‘Have courage to use your own
understanding!’—that is the motto of enlightenment.”[4] It has become
a civilizational social, political, and intellectual starting point to
affirm the general human capacity to develop reason, answer life’s
essential questions, live according to one’s own lights, and become
full and active citizens. One shining example is the first article of
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which says: “[A]ll human
beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed
with reason and conscience.”
If this is true, why is our society awash in weird beliefs, which
people embrace despite an absence of scientific support and against
logic and evidence? Why did 30% of Americans continue to link Saddam
Hussein with 9/11 long after this had been disproved and disavowed?
Our seemingly ineradicable gullibility before half-truths, official
lies, and media manipulation is truly remarkable in a society so based
on education, science, technology, and information—so dependent on the
intellect and demanding that we be rational at every turn. How is it
possible that today has become in Susan Jacoby’s words, the “age of
American unreason”—a time characterized by growing hostility to
science, intelligence, and rationality?[5] As Jacoby points out, we
can not reassure ourselves by pretending that those who reject science
and rationality are holders of recently eclipsed beliefs living
earlier lives in rural backwaters—they are modern people rejecting
modernity, and using its chosen tools to get out their message. These
realities would make the Enlightenment weep.
There are two ways to approach this problem. One is to focus on the
conditions that make for the “intertwined ignorance, anti-rationalism,
and anti-intellectualism” of today’s America. Jacoby does this by
exploring the deleterious effect of television, the internet, and
popular culture, the dumbing-down of politics and education, and
perhaps above all the rise of religious fundamentalism.[6] These shape
the environment for all of us today. But people are not simply the
products of the environment. They choose, create their own behaviors,
and have good reasons for doing as they do. “The problem is,” says
literary critic Laura Miller, “when push comes to shove, we don’t
always feel like facing reality.” As she argues insightfully in a
review of The Age of American Unreason, we must also focus on people’s
motivation for choosing to not be rational, to believe weird things—to
be ignorant.[7]
“Choose,” Embrace,” “accept,” and “deny,” are all crucial starting
points of this discussion. To choose to know is to encounter the world
in a specific way. It is a way of acting. It is to decide to reveal an
aspect of the world, or to let it be revealed, or to accept what
others with appropriate credentials, arguments, and evidence have
revealed about it. Jean-Paul Sartre, in a little-known posthumously
published book, Truth and Existence, stressed the connection between
the two meanings of the French ignorer: to not know, and to ignore. In
English we preserve this link in the shift from ignore: not paying
attention to ignorant: the condition of not knowing. Creationists
ignore, turn away from, refuse to acknowledge, what is there and
waiting to be seen, and for which there is ample evidence: modern
science’s complex but compelling understanding of how the earth,
plants, and animals came into existence. To choose not to know that
humans have evolved over millions of years is to ignore what we have
collectively learned is so.
To choose not to know is an act of bad faith: we seek to deny what we
in some sense already know is there, and we degrade ourselves by
willfully suppressing our awareness of it. We do so because we don’t
want the situation we ignore to be the way it is. Through imprisoning
ourselves in ignorance we seek a kind of fantasy makeover of the world
to fit our desires, crippling our understanding rather than adapting
ourselves to the world by knowing it as it is and acting accordingly.
We deny what may be troubling or disheartening, threatening or
terrifying.[8]
There are many reasons why someone would choose to ignore evolution,
or turn away from it, or deny it. Whether or not people are motivated
to accept or reject it is, of course, often conditioned by forces well
beyond their immediate control—being raised in a subculture that
believes in absolute knowledge based on faith and authority, being
trained in the schizophrenic attitude of rejecting science while
living by its fruits, schooling in Biblical interpretation that
insists on accepting the literal truth of chosen passages of the
Bible, obedience to parents and Fundamentalist religious authorities
who anathematize evolution, being part of a community that stipulates
belief in Creationism as a requirement of belonging. Most churchgoing
African Americans are Creationists, for example, because accepting
evolution entails going against the primacy their pastors accord to a
literal reading of the first book of Genesis. Whatever the motivation,
embracing Creationism is a refusal to undertake the hard and
threatening work of reconciling one’s faith with the realities of
life.
Creationism is only one way people choose not to know today. Another
appears again and again throughout American culture: the maxim,
“Everything happens for a reason.” In addition to the conditions
described by Jacoby, this form of bad faith is motivated by people’s
weak preparation for coping with the enormous and rapidly increasing
amount of essential knowledge explaining an increasingly complex
world. A single day in any life today demands that we learn constantly
about both the basics and the latest knowledge concerning health,
politics, household management, and many other broad areas. It
requires plowing through enormous quantities of information and
imposes constant decisions about what is relevant and what is not;
when one has learned enough about a topic; how to integrate new
information into what one already knows; and how to apply it.[9] We
must become active, intentional, and adaptive learners of new ideas
and information rather than passive absorbers of a relatively stable
body of knowledge. It is up to us to make sense of it all, constantly
synthesizing knowledge drawn from several disciplines.[10] These
habits or abilities are always mentioned among the key aims of
contemporary liberal education.[11]
The problem is that the American education system does not achieve
this. How often do students go beyond the passive learning of
absorbing and trying to remember what they are reading and hearing—to
active learning in which they gain experience in questioning,
validating, and applying it? The little objective evidence that has
been gathered indicates that only only 6% are "proficient" and 77%
"not proficient” in critical thinking, which is, after all, not a
“subject,” but a set of attitudes and abilities learned throughout
one’s education—or not.[12] It is not learned by taking undergraduate
survey courses in various disciplines (the distribution or general
education requirements) which are, furthermore, kept in separate
watertight compartments and not brought or thought together. And it is
not learned in undergraduate majors, whose main function is to prepare
students to specialize and one of whose main goals is to recruit
graduate students. From the research university to the community
college, students are rarely encouraged to integrate different
disciplines.[13]
Belonging to an impatient culture promising instant answers, often
poorly equipped and overwhelmed, most people struggle to piece
together their fragments of faith, knowledge, and experience as best
they can. Some of the most curious spirits restlessly surf the
internet in hot pursuit of questions that their schooling has not
helped them even to ask, let alone answer. They often begin by being
rightly suspicious of all official stories and seeking more compelling
explanations. In the infinite space of the internet, with the whole
culture at one’s fingertips, millions of answers cry out. It is the
freest of all free markets, yet people are rarely trained to negotiate
it.
With immense energy people search their way among gurus, conspiracy
theories, spectacular short cuts, easy answers, the latest political
scandal, parodies of ancient wisdom, pseudo-scholarship decked out in
scientific trappings, real knowledge and thoughtful reflections,
newfangled or eclipsed religious and political wisdom, every
established and every insurgent point of view, and sheer nonsense—and
they are free to consume and reassemble it as they wish.
In this situation and with the tools our culture provides, people
produce today’s most common weird belief: “Everything happens for a
reason.” This expresses a complex contemporary mood that life is
filled with connections beneath the surface; that no-one knows what
these are or how they operate; that they can only be thought about in
a quasi-religious way. We hear the phrase at every turn in the United
States today: spouses telling why they met each other or why they
broke up, one baseball player explaining why he didn’t make the team,
another explaining why he made the team, anyone reflecting on a
coincidence, a student softening the blow of a failing grade, a cancer
patient coming to grips with her illness. Good happenings or bad,
personal tragedies, disasters, matters of chance, striking
coincidences, enormous disappointments, the unexpected—all become
rationalized as being part of a larger plan.
At its root, the maxim mixes events that do indeed have comprehensible
causes outside of ourselves along with pure accidents, and mixes these
up with results that we ourselves produce through our own actions. All
become the mush of a totally deterministic universe in which every
last thing has a meaningful cause (but no one knows what it is) or is
planned by a superhuman mind, presumably directing things for the best
(and whose logic is also unknowable). Our dependence on specific
structures and forces is erased, with all of its specific detail,
supplanted by a vague and unrecognizable force or will. One’s own
responsibility for oneself and the world dissolves into this. And
those who may be held culpable, individuals and institutions, are
spared any reproach for whatever goes wrong. As this low-grade sense
of fate or God or whatever percolates below the surface of American
life today, many of us who lack a sense of control over our lives fall
back on it, as do many traditionally religious people—and so many
others.
And it cannot be completely dismissed. “Everything happens for a
reason” claims, vaguely, that what we experience, but whose reasons we
can’t comprehend, is part of a larger pattern—which is often true. It
expresses people’s hunch, often quite wise, that what happens is
linked to larger forces and causes than those we have been trained to
grasp. And it is often a wish to see justice done, even if only
ultimately, and a hope for real meaning where there seems to be sheer
randomness.
But it is cast in a way that usually ends discussion rather than
beginning it. A healthy sense of linkages, larger purposes, and logics
and forces beyond our control might lead people to environmental,
epidemiological, sociological, political, economic, and historical
study, and yield important but troubling insight. Is it any surprise
that people are motivated instead to avoid making this vague intuition
concrete, and instead continue recirculating empty profundities?
Creationism and “Everything happens for a reason” are not the only
ways people embrace ignorance today. The opposite choice, to know, to
reveal, to use one’s reason, depends on an increasingly rare
understanding that it is possible to know. This means overcoming the
widespread postmodern skepticism toward objective knowledge, as well
as the puzzling and even more widespread ignorance about how much we
humans already do know. Being able to do the first depends on
understanding what objective knowledge really is. Knowing is a matter
of humility. It entails allowing oneself to enter into discussion, to
submit what one says to the judgement of others, to be proven wrong by
them, to be seen as fallible, and thus to realize that any particular
piece of knowledge is always tentative, always subject to revision,
always demanding verification. This in turn implies a commitment to a
communicative process in which we are always in dialogue with others,
and in which they are always looking over our shoulders and commenting
on what we claim to be true.
Truth is never absolute, but is objective. It is never raised above
humans, but always takes place with, for, and about others. It emerges
in “communicative action” and follows rules, which themselves are
always up for discussion.[14] This is even, or especially, so of
science. Its knowledge is self-consciously provisional, can be
challenged and even overturned—which makes it dramatically different
than the supposed “absolute knowledge” conferred by religious faith.
Truth, then, can never be the realm of the dogmatic, inflexible demand
and the obedient, submissive response. Nor is it the postmodern space
occupied by a near-infinity of individual and group points of view.
Its spirit is not best imbibed passively, by rote, or by accepting
that everyone’s claim to truth is as valid as everyone else’s. It is
generated actively, among people, questioningly, challengingly. To
choose to learn today is to accept living within this process, to
embrace being part of the widest possible human community.
What, then, can we know today? When I started thinking about this
essay, I asked friends and acquaintances what they thought were life’s
most important unanswered questions. The responses were fascinating:
How can the world become a better place? After death, will you meet
the people from your life who have died? Would I be different if I
were born on a different day? What causes envy? Is there life after
death? Why in every society are men more violent than women? What is
it that makes me myself from one moment to the next? Is paranormal
experience possible? Is truly altruistic behavior possible? What is
beauty? What causes cancer? What is/ where is/ who is God? Where will
I be after death? How do you know if you’ve chosen the best path for
your life? Are we reborn in different forms? Is there a soul that
exists separately from the body?
After a short while, I realized what was wrong with my original
question. It encouraged among my friends the sense that life’s most
important questions were in fact unanswerable. I myself had been
unconsciously participating in one of our culture’s great weird
beliefs, thoughtlessly pointing people toward life’s great mysteries
rather than the great human achievements in making sense of our world.
I realized my mistake while watching a PBS program on the human heart
that focused on what was learned by the Framingham Study of Risk
Factors in Heart Disease. Its first published results, in 1961,
revolutionized how we think about heart attacks by confirming the
decisive effect of smoking, diet, and lack of exercise.[15] We now
know all this! We know dozens, hundreds, thousands of things that are
vital for human understanding and well-being—have verified, confirmed,
and implemented them. In this, the twenty-first century, so much that
was once cloaked in darkness is known, and so much that is really
essential to our lives is knowable. We sell ourselves short to pretend
otherwise. We have developed methods of analysis, synthesis, and
reasoning that can be taught and learned. All of this is now part of
what John Dewey called the “social consciousness of the race” and it
belongs to all of us. It is waiting to be claimed and used.
As a result, either at present or in the foreseeable future, we can
know when the earth came into being and how. Why black Americans are
poorer than white Americans. How human freedom evolved. How life
began. Why cities like Detroit, Manchester, Liverpool, Leipzig, Halle,
and Ivanovno have been shrinking for a generation. What people need to
have the chance to live better lives. Why Creationism flourishes in
the United States. How the human brain operates. Why Americans are
more religious than people in every other advanced society. How many
people the earth can support at an adequate level of subsistence. Why
the Holocaust happened. Why Pizarro conquered the Incas and not the
Incas Spain. Why Americans are less tall than members of other
advanced societies. Why the British were able to dominate massive
areas of Africa. Why so much of Africa remains poor today. Why the U.
S. murder rate is higher than any other advanced society. Why Honduras
and South Africa have the highest murder rates in the world. Why
Greenland and the polar ice caps are melting. Why university costs
rise faster than the rate of inflation. How the incredible diversity
of plants and animals has evolved from single-celled beings over the
last 3.6 billion years. Why Israel is reluctant to make peace with the
Palestinians. Why Palestinians are reluctant to make peace with
Israel.
We can answer most of these already, and none of the remainder will
remain shrouded in mystery forever, or even for very long. Each reader
will be able to make a similarly impressive list of life’s answerable
questions. This is the important list. It tells us where we are. It is
the one we can use to live our lives and make sense of our world. It
is the one from which we can take bearings. It provides what we need
to create a decent life—if we choose to know.
Notes
1. “Belief”?—even the designer of the survey fails to understand this
difference between science and faith, that the evidence of the first
compels assent, not belief.
2. According to Harris Interactive Nov 30, 2007.
3. Shermer has made a career of doing battle with anti-rational and
anti-scientific currents—on talk shows, in debates, as editor of
Skeptic magazine. See Why People Believe Weird Things (New York,
1997), 24-43.
4. Immanuel Kant, “An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment?”
5. Susan Jacoby, The Age of American Unreason (New York, 2008).
6. Jacoby, xx.
7. Laura Miller, “America Closes the Book on Intelligence,” February
15, 2008.
8. Ronald Aronson, “Introduction: The Ethics of Truth,” Jean-Paul
Sartre, Truth and Existence (Chicago, 1992).
9. Traditional education in societies’ stable traditional knowledges
used to form an essential aspect of human life, in all cultures and
for nearly all of history. Most of what one needed to know was passed
on directly and experientially, by one’s elders and parents, during
the long process of growing up. By watching, by practicing, by
listening, by memorizing stories, young persons acquired the necessary
skills as well as what Dewey called the “social consciousness of the
race”—the society’s historically developed cultural outlook. Dewey,
“My Pedagogic Creed”
10. These are connected with the “scholarship of integration,”
“scholarship of teaching,” and “scholarship of application” described
by Ernest Boyer in Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the
Professoriate (Princeton, 1991).
11. They are included in Greater Expectations: A New Vision for
Learning as a Nation Goes to College, published by the Association of
American Colleges and Universities, an impressive clarion call to
transform American higher education.
12. Liberal Education Outcomes: A Preliminary Report on Student
Achievement in College (Washington, D. C., 2005), sections 4 and 5.
13. For the most part, active learning takes place during graduate
education which, however, is professional training with a greatly
narrowed focus. Even so, except for Creationism, here is where the
sharpest drop-off in weird beliefs can be seen. Perhaps this is
because graduate students become intentional learners by setting their
own goals, and because they engage in active research—no longer simply
receiving and recalling knowledge, but now applying and creating it.
Active researchers who knows what it is to know will have
significantly less tolerance for believing in UFOs, witches,
astrology, or the devil (although apparently more accept
reincarnation!). 14. Jürgen Habermas has written a number of works
developing this theme, above all Theory of Communicative Action 2
vols. (Boston, 1982, 1987). 15. Affairs of the Heart, PBS Documentary,
#4, “How’s Your Heart?”
Ronald Aronson is, to quote The New Humanist, 'internationally
recognised as the foremost Sartre scholar in the English-speaking
world.' His latest book is Living Without God: New Directions for
Atheists, Agnostics, Secularists, and the Undecided, from which this
is an extract.
end
Peace,
Doc
Clairbear
news:925ff91a-bc69-4fd3...@b31g2000prb.googlegroups.com:
> On Nov 9, 9:37 pm, rst0wxyz <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 9, 6:08 pm, pg <pen...@catholic.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Nov 7, 9:06 am, Clairbear <cl...@Verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>> > > Penang <kalamb...@gmail.com> wrote
>> > > innews:fbd8ace8-6686-44ad-a522-
ddee8a...@t39g2000prh.googlegrou
>> > > ps.com:
Because we elected an empty shirt.
Clairbear
news:96a5b7ff-dd85-4f14...@i20g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
> On Nov 10, 12:55 am, pg <pen...@catholic.org> wrote:
>> On Nov 9, 9:37 pm, rst0wxyz <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Nov 9, 6:08 pm, pg <pen...@catholic.org> wrote:
>>
>> > > On Nov 7, 9:06 am, Clairbear <cl...@Verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>> > > > Penang <kalamb...@gmail.com> wrote
>> > > > innews:fbd8ace8-6686-44ad-a522-d
> dee8a...@t39g2000prh.googlegroups.com:
>> > > > >> tit read up on cult of personality A cult of personality or
He wants change but does not say what it is Change shouild mean
something totally new
And yet most of his cabinet are Clinton retreads
rst0wxyz
But the Clinon administration had a surplus, and the country at peace.
Clairbear
news:e48e8398-79d8-450e...@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com:
> On Nov 10, 8:21 am, Clairbear <cl...@Verizon.net> wrote:
>> rst0wxyz <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote
>> innews:96a5b7ff-dd85-4f14-a88c-fc8756
> c14...@i20g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
>> > On Nov 10, 12:55 am, pg <pen...@catholic.org> wrote:
>> > Didn't you hear the resounding "change" the voters wanted? Obama
>> > can!!!
>>
>> He wants change but does not say what it is Change shouild mean
>> something totally new
>> And yet most of his cabinet are Clinton retreads
>
> But the Clinon(oops those damn typos) administration had a surplus,
Are you sure about that did we eliminate the debt or just ignor it
> and the country at peace.
>
Only because he did not fight back when Al Qaeda repeatedly attack US
interests and personel
Oh but wait what about Kosovo
rst0wxyz
Ooooops, you're right, and Hillary was dodging bullets at the airport
there!!!!
the Fucking Boudha
the Chinese are taking Malaysia for the Chinese poeple.
China is so backward .