Comments
Chuck Baldwin or Ron Paul are the ONLY choices for White voters. Yet the self-hating Whites are too stupid to even notice, much less care! What a bunch of hoof-diseased cattle we have in our midst.
Posted by at 7:08 PM on May 6
“We can be sure that a president Obama will be push for the same anti-white policies of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, while posing as a post-racial unifier,” he says. “The question is whether or not the public will buy that facade.”……….I asked my Liberal Brother in Law with Obama running for president and getting 91% of the Black vote why should I not vote for David Duke.I got no answer.The fact is as white nationalist we should punish race traitors like John Mccain by voteing for Barack Obama.
Posted by Tony Soprano at 7:15 PM on May 6
I admit, I can see the point to suppoting Obama for the reasons white nationalists give.
Posted by Bobby at 7:32 PM on May 6
An Obama presidency would benefit our cause immensely.
Although I think that the masses are incapable of true “racial consciousness.”
The racial attitudes of the masses are shaped only by their unconscious minds (white flight, race differences, etc.).
Only a small minority of people in every race, especially our race, the White race, have an inborn “biological” or “racial” consciousness. (And I think this is a good thing)
We can help bring out the unconscious racial attitudes of the masses, but that’s about all.
I am convinced that most White people only have a “social consciousness.” Which is the main reason why our race is in the trouble it is in.
It’s almost a sort of “biological” or “racial” mindblindness that many Whites seem to suffer from.
I’m sure some of you have noticed this.
Posted by Smash The Multicultural Illusion! at 7:46 PM on May 6
I was very disappointed when I read Jared’s comments on Obama.I felt anyone with advanced white consciousness could NEVER support a leftist mulatto and would speak out in very forceful terms as to the major threat his election posed to our people.Hopefully, Taylor will completely change his tune. I detest McCain..but we can abstain from voting for president or vote for a third party.It is imperative for all racialists to oppose Obama and see it as an imperative that his election would be a DISASTER for our people.
Posted by Charles at 7:48 PM on May 6
“The whites who support Obama tend to be young, affluent liberals who truly believe the Obama campaign is about racial unity. But blacks are not supporting Obama so they can hold hands and sing Dave Matthews songs with rich white kids from the suburbs. (I recently saw a news clip of a free Dave Matthews concert given in support of Obama and literally every face in the crowd was white.) Clearly these two main groups of Obama supporters are on a collision course.”
Well said, my white brother. An excellent article overall — with extra bonus marks for making fun of Dave Matthews fans.
I’m generally not of the “worse is better” school. I can see the point of the “worse is better” crowd — I’m just too worried about what “worse” might actually MEAN to take the chance.
Yet there is, I admit, some logic to the theory that, if a large-scale racial reckoning is indeed inevitable — and I’m sure every AmRenner thinks that at SOME point, SOME sort of clash will transpire, with or without widespread bloodshed — then maybe it’s better to GET IT OVER WITH. “If it must be done, then ‘tis better ‘twere done quickly,” as Shakespeare teaches.
Far as I can make out, the only positive outcome of Shoutbamalama becoming president, is that the country might repeat the experience of NYC in the early ’90s. Back then, sophisticated, urbane, ultraliberal New Yorkers thought that it would be the sophisticated, urbane, and ultraliberal thing to do to vote for David Dinkins. Turning over the keys to America’s #1 city to a benign-appearing elderly colored gent — whom Jackie Mason hilariously compared to “a washroom attendant” and “a fancy schwartzer in a moustache” — seemed like a good idea at the time. But come re-election time — after the Crown Heights riots (and oh-so-much, MUCH more), prolonging the pain no longer seemed like such a good idea.
The best thing about the Dinkins admin was that it lasted one term only. If elected, Obama, too, is certain to be a one-termer. And maybe — MAYBE — like the white people of NYC, maybe the white people of America would cure liberals of their mania to be ruled by a black man. You know: get it out of their system. New Yorkers tried it, they didn’t like it, they’ve never done it since — and they seem unlikely to do it again. If I could be GUARANTEED that the same would happen on the national level with Obama, then I might be brought round to the “worse is better” argument. But the amount of social damage — much of it probably irreversible — that Obama could do during four years, still strikes me as too much of a risk. So I’m one of those holding my nose and reluctantly supporting Juan McAmnesty.
At any rate, this much is beyond dispute: No presidential election has ever been more about COLOR than 2008. Obama’s white supporters aren’t “colorblind” — on the contrary, they are judging him by his color first and foremost. His complexion is the very REASON they support him. They have been duped into the wishful thinking that a black (or at least NONWHITE) president would finally bring blacks into the American family. Make them stop committing crime, stop dropping out of school. Make them get off welfare. And generally enable them to (belatedly) achieve their full potential.
Needless to say, no such general transformation among African Americans will take place — either under BHO or anybody else. It just ain’t on their schedule.
What self-hating white Obamaniacs don’t understand is that “full potential” for blacks, well, it just ain’t all that full. If blacks truly had the same potential as whites, shouldn’t we have seen more of it by now? Putting one of their own in the Oval Office can’t make blacks more than what they are. It won’t help them.
But it sure could hurt the rest of us…
Posted by The Incredible Shrinking White Man at 7:55 PM on May 6
I wouldn’t vote for obama the muslim if they gave me a million bucks…truely I wouldn’t ….he will finish the job bush started and America will no longer be America….trust me…I hope the whites will wake up who…might think he’s special….he’s nutsssssssssssssss!
Posted by lydia at 8:02 PM on May 6
I want Obama to be the next President. I want every non-White dirtbag in the country to feel that they’ve got a friend in the Brown House, I want every stupid liberal to have to explain why they voted for third world governance. I want the mob to riot when the freebies don’t come fast enough. Those who fear a swarm of African immigrants should recall that the GOP is already importing Somalis and Burundians along with Mexico and China. I want a crisis, I want a collapse. In times of mortal danger, people who know what’s going on have the advantage. Our people don’t deserve to lose, but they deserve a whipping. Most of us learned from experience what multiculturalism means, not from reading. Whites need more experience, and soon, before we are too few to protect ourselves.
Posted by Schoolteacher at 8:05 PM on May 6
“Worse is better” is gambling the country on voters’ future discontent with disastrous consequences of incompetent presidency. Are we so desperate that we have to gamble everything we have? What is the bet fails?
I see many morons vocally supporting Obama without having one credible reason to believe that he is capable of running the country in direction of prosperity and freedom. I accept this as a result of failed federal and state policies that pay stupid people to have many kids (who aren’t any smarter than their parent were). But when those who have some brains begin supporting Obama hoping that his win will open voters’ eyes on fallacies of liberalism and diversity, I wish I could tell them: “Are you, guys, nuts?!!!”.
Posted by A Reader at 8:11 PM on May 6
Buy stock in ammunition. I predict an Obama presidency equaling the increased sales of ammunition over the four-year run.
Posted by ilovemyfirstamendment at 8:39 PM on May 6
Someone, ANYONE, puleeze explain to me how McCain, detestable as he is, could possibly be worse than the Mulato Messiah, a.i.a. THE OBAMINATION!
Obama is a political newbie. Does NOT have a grasp on international politics. Does NOT have any real political leadership experience. WOULD favor all the negatives — AMNESTY and OPEN BORDERS, just like McCain. Plus Obama would open the doors wide to a flood of African primitives who can’t wait to get their free ride, courtesy of the American Taxpayer, a.k.a., YOU and ME!
Obama makes a lot of mileage out of claiming we need to unite — me, I fail to see a single grain of benefit, “uniting” with sociopathic, dysfunctional racial failures known as Afro-Americans or Blacks.
Posted by Fed Up at 8:45 PM on May 6
Much as I detest McCain, I regard him as by
far a lesser evil than Obama. The principal
legacies of a president are his appointments to
the Supreme Court. Those of a President Obama
would be infinitely worse than those of a President
McCain.
Posted by Larry at 9:08 PM on May 6
Tony Soprano wrote:
The fact is as white nationalist we should punish race traitors like John Mccain by voteing for Barack Obama.
Tony,
-Not to punish the race traitors, but to awaken people. It’s probably not going to get better until it gets worse - much worse, and it will with Obama as President. Many White Nationalists feel that it is better for Obama to become president than McCain. McCain is another side of the same coin, and the things he does will not contribute to the continuing awakening of White Europeans. Blacks are going to gain in confidence when/if Obama becomes president and they’re going to go wild as they usually do when they gain some sort of advantage or perceived advantage over Whites. This will hurt in the short term, but it will be beneficial in the long term. Some people are actually beginning to think that we need an Obama Presidency for this purpose. Thanks.
Posted by Awakened at 9:19 PM on May 6
Most likely I’m going to vote for Hillary or Obama. If the choice is Hillary I may need resuscitation, and a barf bag afterward. And a two week family-leave vacation.
Posted by at 9:34 PM on May 6
Well well, the fact Chuck Baldwin is going to be on the ballot has changed my decision of writing in ron paul, and just voting for him!. All whites should be voting for him to send a ncie clear message to McCain. Though this ofcourse wont be the case and despite the exposed rotten flesh of the sinister Obama campaign, he will be elected. It will help us out regardless.
Posted by Stuck in No Mans Land at 9:42 PM on May 6
An Obama vote punishes the Republicans, gets white kids home from Iraq and may bring race issues to the front page for four years. Elect him and dump your stocks. Its Jimmy Carter all over again.
Posted by Mike T. at 9:42 PM on May 6
The analogy to NYC is a good one. David Dinkins was so bad New York liberals voted twice for Rudolf Giuliani, a very tough law and order guy who would have been unthinkable as mayor 20 years before. White liberals need a good dose of black incompetency. Obama is their man. Let them have him. Let’s give liberalism a friendly shove…down the stairs!
Posted by Xenophon at 9:49 PM on May 6
Support for Obama is madness. When do you ever win by losing?
I hate to sound like an optimist, but the 2008 election may be the last stand of the hard left in America. Naturally, like most God-fearing conservatives, I would sooner see the left defeated by the leadership of a Ronald Reagan.
But there’s a certain poetic justice in seeing the left tear itself to pieces over what’s basically not all that different than a gang turf fight. Find me one principle in the Obama or Hillary campaigns other than “we’re going to run the government and we know what’s best for you.”
Posted by at 9:50 PM on May 6
Sorry, I can’t be so insouciant about Obama. Black thugs are getting more and more bold and audacious. They’re figuring that Obama’s winning, ergo they’re taking over, ergo they can do whatever they want to white people.
Posted by Question Diversity at 9:55 PM on May 6
Auster views McCain as a virtual death sentence for conservatism in America.
On the other hand, a McCain presidency could cause a serious rift in the Republican party and finally, honest talk about what differentiates neoconservatives and paleoconservatives. It could even cause the Republican party to split up into two opposing camps. In other words, a McCain presidency could be a good thing in its own perverse way. It’s impossible to predict the future with any certainty.
“I think many smarter, far-thinking blacks are going to be worried that any time they start talking about discrimination, certainly institutional racism, people are going to say, ‘Hey, look, you’ve got a black president for heaven’s sake.’”
And then it could work the other way: “Look, blacks can’t be less intelligent or less capable than anyone else. We have a black president after all and the whole country hasn’t fallen apart.”
a black race-driven president who uses his office to excuse black rioters and defend black gangs who attack white kids will be a real eye-opener for many a nice white liberal—to say nothing of the slumbering “conservative” masses.
To quote Charleton Putnam in Race and Reason “But I fear you mistake the problem, including the depth of the hypnosis. What we learn from experience depends on how we interpret it. If one has been taught to interpret the behavior of the [black] as simply a reflection of one’s own injustice, one gains nothing but deeper hypnosis. Surely you realize that Northern riots have been used as an excuse for more appeasement and more White guilt.”
Posted by Tim in Indiana at 10:02 PM on May 6
I understand the WN take on Obama, but I’ve decided to sit this one out.
The political process has degenerated into utter garbage. I will no longer honor it by taking it seriously.
Posted by at 10:07 PM on May 6
Larry,
Why would Obama be worse? Do you say this just because he is Black?
I was wondering what the Amren community was saying about the current elections. Its really disappointing to see that after a couple of years away that I return to find the same rhetoric. Its ironic that most (98%) of the people who post on Amren have far more racist attitudes than Rev Right. Well, I have not actually heard any of his comments in full context so I can not really say he is racist, but I have listened to many of your arguments to conclusion. One thing that I hoped many of you would understand is that there is a difference between being proud of your race and cultural heritage, advocating for your community’s interests, and being an all out bigot. I challenge you to stop the racism. Among Black socio-political views you will find assimilationist (those happy to be Americans first), pluralist (those that are proud to be Americans and Black), politically charged yet bankrupt (a new term I just coined for you to describe those that see only in Black and White, have no strategy, and are guilty of what you all call race baiting), and finally you have the conscious Black nationalist (those individuals who see themselves as Black first but takes a position based on ideology and interest not race). Contrary to what you may think the later typology is not racist. In fact, he or she is willing to recognize the challenges that are faced in Black communities and works toward real solutions. Historical injustices have to be acknowledge and present wrongs have to be righted. Example, in my daughter’s history class there is an entire chapter dedicated to Pres. Andrew Jackson. From the American point of view he carved the position of the presidency bringing power to the executive branch. From an American Indian point of view he was a tyrant that went so far as to ignore a Supreme Court order to honor American treaty rights. He was responsible for the trail of tears that killed countless people. That is fact, no pandering, no baiting. You can’t honestly present one side of the story in a history class and think your doing justice to history. In that same class breeze through American Indian history in less than a week and never quite made it to the African American experience. Come on, only a handful of the assimilationist are going to accept that. There are other past and present examples of wrongs that need real advocacy. Many of which have grave consequences on people of color. However, I have never seem the Amren community acknowledge or validate any Black, Hispanic, American Indian interest or concern. I have to tell you we can’t live together in peace like that and I have to tell you that I see most of you (98%) as the white version of the Black racially charged and bankrupt.
I believe Obama is probably a pluralist according to my definition. He is in fact the ultimate example of a pluralist and that is the reason he gets White votes. While I believe he is proud to be Black, as a political candidate he is not for Black interest but rather American interests. I think he would be good for the country because he has a mild and humble character that will go along way at home and abroad. At first I was not planning to vote for Obama in fear that too many Black people would be under the false belief that “we’ve finally made it.” If a win for Obama is a win for the nation it speaks nothing of furthering the interests of the Black community. So as a result, I guess I will vote for Obama because I believe him to be the best candidate.
Inkpaduta strikes again.
Posted by Inkpaduta at 10:36 PM on May 6
Is worse today better for whites in the long run? I guess I have mixed feelings on this subject. An Obama presidency could mean terrible and irreversible damage to white interests. The typical WN thinks this will deliver whites to our cause, but I’m not so sure. I’d like to believe that, but whites are so passive, apathetic, and clueless that I’m beginning to think most of us are only fit for slavery or extinction.
To add insult to injury, Hollywood celebrity Tom Hanks just officially endorsed Obama as have other celebs. Really, would black celebrities line up behind David Duke or Pat Buchanan? We all know the answer to that question. With few exceptions, the elites are letting the white middle and working class twist in the wind.
I can guarantee that gun and ammo sales will skyrocket if Obama gets elected president.
Posted by Super Dave at 10:55 PM on May 6
Anyone who would consider voting for McCain needs to stay the hell away from white nationalism.
Posted by Joe at 11:32 PM on May 6
Inkpaduta,
We have the examples of Haiti, Atlanta, Detroit, Washington, DC, and the whole of subSaharan Africa as an example of the despotic rule of blacks. We have countless examples of mismanaged corporations that have floundered since blacks take over them. Black rule has murdered more people percentage-wise than than whites rule ever has. Obama will continue the trend.
Posted by SandyCSA at 12:18 AM on May 7
Inkpaduta strikes again.
Posted by Inkpaduta at 10:36 PM on May 6
With ignorance and an uncanny will to enforce the faux of liberalism.
Standing up for ones heritage and culture, sometimes means getting gritty. You want us to cower and play the field like a bunch of weaklings? im sorry but the west was built on backbone.
And no war was won by backing down.
If a white tries to outright say he wants to preserve his heritage, he is perceived as “racist” off the bat, no matter the circumstances.
Along with our will to preserve, is the will to expose the truth, the truth of racial reality, a truth you seem to want to deny deny deny and deem us “racists” for seeing. LoL, i bet you think yourself some crusader here, coming here and giving your scholarly advice to a “bunch of bigots”, then you’ll saddle up on your high horse and be away again no?
How about you stick around and not flee like a liberal?
Or is it you are afraid of this racial reality? that it may shine light upon certain hereditary traits, that it may expose certain characteristics more often found in some peoples than others?
My bet is you will, like most other “tried and true liberal knights” simply back off and not appear on these forums again for some time, then swing on by to bash us and give us more of your “wisdom” , then off you are again~
Posted by Stuck in No Mans Land at 12:20 AM on May 7
You gotta be impressed, with all the deep thinkers wantin’ to vote for Obamy. Sorta reminds me of the feller who got one of his legs cut off. Seems he couldn’t stand it,him bein’ one legged and all.So he went and hired this other feller to chop off his other leg.
Posted by The Old Sage at 12:37 AM on May 7
I don’t agree with everything in the Constitution Party platform. But McCain and both of the Democrats are unthinkable, and Paul isn’t going to be on the ballot, so Chuck Baldwin it is.
An Obama presidency might wake up a few whites, but at the cost of doing irreversible damage to this country (an amnesty for 20 million illegals, which unfortunately Clinton and McCain also favor). Let’s face it, most whites can’t be woken up.
To Tim in Indiana: It’s nice to think that a McCain presidency would cause a rift in the Republican party and bring about a split into two parties. But if that was going to happen it would have happened with the disaster of the Bush presidency (there is scarcely any difference between the two). Republicans could have voted for their one real alternative (Paul) but only 9% of them did. The rest voted for men who all promised to be more like Bush than Bush.
Posted by WR the elder at 12:43 AM on May 7
Actually I was engrossed in thought about the strategy of voting for Obama to wake up white people on the loss of power they are experiencing across the board in this nation. I am not talking about the elite whites. They will always have power. I’m talking about regular hard working white folks who are discriminated against in almost every area of public life in the U.S. Then it finally hit me, of course Obama should NOT be supported. Why? Because the strategy of waking up whites will fail. Whites in this nation will never care about their disempowerment. They have been in general, so dumbed down that having a grass hut with a power line coming into it to the television and a couple dozen of six packs in the fridge is good enough for most of them. In order for people to be shocked into a different better mindset, they have to be aware they are in trouble to beginn with.
Posted by Bobby at 12:43 AM on May 7
B Hussein is the least qualified candidate in the last 50 years. If he wins, there will be no United States.
BHO is a moslem. As a moslem, he would try to overthrow our government.
Posted by flyingtiger at 12:44 AM on May 7
Whites under black rule has worked out well under Mugabe. Maybe the worst is better crowd should have moved there 20yrs ago and witnessed how thats worked for the benifit of whites. The only awakening whites had was understanding that cowering to blacks was the norm for any chance of safety,and giving up all their land and what they had worked for all their lives-many loosing theirs lives. Is worst better when you let a people completely destroy your country when theres nothing left but waste? I guess that would finally be mission accomplished for the worst is better crowd. I personally think these are only excuses for those who wish to stand on the fense because of one thing,”FEAR”. McCain would be like voting for Ted the traitor Kennedy. Voting for Hillary would be no different.Voting for Obama would be no different. I’ll waste my vote for a true conservative!
Posted by Billy at 12:51 AM on May 7
“Worse is better” is gambling the country on voters’ future discontent with disastrous consequences of incompetent presidency. Are we so desperate that we have to gamble everything we have? What is the bet fails?
I see many morons vocally supporting Obama without having one credible reason to believe that he is capable of running the country in direction of prosperity and freedom. I accept this as a result of failed federal and state policies that pay stupid people to have many kids (who aren’t any smarter than their parent were). But when those who have some brains begin supporting Obama hoping that his win will open voters’ eyes on fallacies of liberalism and diversity, I wish I could tell them: “Are you, guys, nuts?!!!”.
Posted by A Reader at 12:54 AM on May 7
Obama for president? Imagine what cases his attorney general will prosecute. The bills from the Reid-Pelosi Congress he will sign.
How many more Ruth Bader Ginsburgs would he appoint? How many precarious 5-4 decisions would be reversed?The same is true for a president Rodham.
Posted by at 1:01 AM on May 7
Maybe if McCain picked a true Conservative as a running mate and then retired a week or so after being sworn in as Potus.
Otherwise, he is on his own. Let him sell viagra with Dole and Chez Bush on the trash heap of history.
Posted by at 2:57 AM on May 7
SandyCSA wrote “Black rule has murdered more people percentage-wise than whites rule ever has. Obama will continue the trend.”
Sandy I think you have to review your math. Don’t just make off the cuff statements. Your comments are precisely why a single sided history is wrong. Are you even aware of the atrocities committed by western countries? For example, are you aware that western nations including the United States have promoted instability in developing nations by choosing political sides and arming the side of choice? In a real democracy the people should get to choose their leadership not a foreign government. Secondly, you’ve pointed out failure but have completely left out examples of success.
Stuck in No Mans Land wrote “If a white tries to outright say he wants to preserve his heritage, he is perceived as “racist” off the bat, no matter the circumstances.”
Well, this is what the Amren community could be working on addressing. The problem is that many people here appear to be virulent racists who compare human beings to cockroaches and other pests. This doesn’t help your case. I think your argument for preserving White culture in places like Switzerland are good because Switzerland is a homogenous society that has never bothered anyone. Since the American Indians have a moral claim on the US and Africans have a moral claim on various African nations, I can not rationalize White people disproportionately controlling resources or single sidedness in these places. If your going to live in the U.S. I think your going to have to learn to live with us. You can structure your households according to your values and surround yourself with people who are similar to you. No one should tell you who to let in your home or who you should allow your daughter to date. However, white pride has historically translated into white superiority and privilege. That is what I believe is wrong.
I have stuck around and I have processed what many people here have to say. I think listening to the Amren arguments as well as other so called white conservatives has definitely help me avoid the thinking error quagmires of the “racially charged but bankrupt.” What’s unfortunate is I eventually felt as though I was wasting my time because people didn’t seem interested in a dialogue, but rather just wanted to cling to the most absurd propositions. I.E. calling Obama a Muslim when he told you he was a Christian 50 times. You can’t have a dialogue with that.
Posted by Inkpaduta at 3:13 AM on May 7
You guys are insane. Vote for Obama? If you think things are bad now, just wait for an Obama presidency. You think it will wake up white America? No way. I need to live here for another 50 years. I don’t want to leave unless I have to. McCain is the only sane choice.
Posted by at 4:51 AM on May 7
The problem with the idea of electing Obama, and Democrats in general on the idea that they will scare the nation out of their sleep is that they could and will do great damage to this nation in the time allotted. They will act swiftly to institutionalize opression at all levels. Like a great ratchet, we will lurch to the left, never to return. How long have we been dealing with civil rights laws that were recognized as tyranny when they were passed and were designed to sunset. The sunset dates come and go, and the congress always renews them without hardly any public debate. There is a large contingency in this nation that would like to destroy it as we know it. irresponsibility seems to be the order of the day in Washington. We were promised by the Republicans a great push to get rid of leftist trash in our laws and institutions and shrink the size of the Federal government, and they sat on their thumbs the whole time. About all you can say is that they reformed welfare. But then if that’s so, then what was going on in New Orleans during and after Hurricane Katrina? Wasn’t what happened there a result of a still firmly entrenched welfare class? Mc Cain sent me an Email. He says he will appoint constructionist (honest) judges. But then he also said that he learned his lesson on amnesty. Yet, now he seems to be going back to his old position. Why wouldn’t he? It’s HIS issue. Will he appoint constructionist judges? Who knows? But we do know that Hillary and Obama won’t. Many policies stand on the rulings of judicial activist judges, and as such are dishonest in nature. A lot of bad law could be unraveled if the right (honest) judges were to be put in place. Democrats know this and are trying (quite sucessfully) to stall judicial appointments until they can get their corrupt people in place. Remember when the Republicans threatened to rewrite the senate rules when the dems were blocking the senate confirmation process for judges? They should have just done it. But they just didn’t have the ‘nads. Now they don’t have the power. I will probably support Mc Cain, but with the understanding that either way, we’re boned. The best thing that could happen is if the delegates at the Republican convention overthrew Mc Cain and put in someone who is a real constitutionalist. But in order for that to happen, Mc Cain would have to be caught doing something really bad with a goat or something. Not likely to happen. Like I said, we’re boned.
Posted by The Quadfather at 6:58 AM on May 7
I believe two things fairly confidently: whoever is elected in November will preside over the most serious economic depression in the country’s history and that there will be a racial conflict of CWII proportions within the next 10-20 years.
Given this background, an Obama victory could be a “good” thing because he will be blamed for the economic depression (one which is likely to make the depression of the 30’s look mild) and will be clearly identified with black racial interests on a national scale. Obama truly hates whites in a visceral sense and his administration will surely alienate them en mass by pushing the racial spoils system to the limit at a time of scarce resources. Obama, although he will try, is less likely to succeed at direct attacks at white culture such as banning the Confederate flag than RINO’s such a McCain or even Marxists like Hilary.
Hillary will be more of the same leftist garbage—open borders, extension of the welfare state, more taxes, class warfare, and what has become typical elitist corruption. McCain wil go out of his way to prove that he is not a bad racist and in doing so may well do more damage to whites than even Obama is capable of. His administration will be full of minorities and he will continue the war in Iraq with its resultant drain on the treasury and on American lives (mostly white). In effect he will be all that is bad about the current Bush mixed with a political outlook (excluding the war) of Nancy Pellosi. He will permanently destroy what is left of the Republican party (admittedly they is little left).
Clearly Ron Paul would be the best of all possible worlds in the sense that he is the only hope of returning America to its founding principles and of maintaining its identity as a Western nation. He will not be on the ticket, however, so we are left with a meaningless write in, not voting or voting for one of the three major candidates. Obama is looking better and better all the time for reasons he will never understand.
I personally detest Obama for all that he is and stands for, but I can understand how worse may well be better—if there is to be ethnic warfare in the US, the sooner it starts the better off whites will be, not only because the number of hispanics will only grow with time but also because the military will only become increasingly minority as well. We need the military with its heavy weapons to be predominantly on our side. Would you rather fight with 67% of the population white or with 51% white? Time is running out and Obama may well serve as the catalyst, together with the imminent economic depression, in sparking a real revolution. He may unintentionally be the savior of the white race in America. We will see.
Posted by at 7:19 AM on May 7
>>>Black thugs are getting more and more bold and audacious. They’re figuring that Obama’s winning, ergo they’re taking over, ergo they can do whatever they want to white people.
The practical ANSWER being to own and carry a handgun. If you find yourself in a potentially sticky situation, pull it out and let them know messing with you has a blood price… THEIR’S!
Posted by Fed Up at 7:57 AM on May 7
Better an open Cultural Marxist(Obama) than a Cultural Marxist masquerading as a conservative. The fact that McCain was made the presumptive nominee by GOP primary voters shows how blinded by the traditional labels poorly informed voters can be. McCain will continue the neocon practice of selling domestic liberalism, Wilsonian internationalism and corporate globalism as true conservatism and the majority of GOP voters will fall into line as they have in the past. A McCain defeat will be a defeat for the neocons-and that is necessary.
Posted by icr at 10:14 AM on May 7
As to “white nationalists” voting
for Obama, you know what masochists
say: “Victory through defeat.”
Posted by at 10:24 AM on May 7
There are reasons for supporting Obama over McCain that go beyond ‘worse is better.’ If McCain gets elected, he will quickly cut a bipartisan deal to amnesty the 20 million or so illegal immigrants. And many Republican senators and congressmen will go along because he’s a ‘fellow’ Republican.
If Obama gets elected, he will be much more constrained on the amnesty issue. Republican senators and congressmen will be much less likely to go along simply because he’s a Democrat.
Obama would also raise the minimum wage and enforce it. That, in itself, would eliminate one of the main incentives for employers to hire illegals.
Finally, Obama would be president at a time when the U.S. is going into a recession. He would (unfairly) get the blame and very quickly become a lameduck president. In two years time, conditions would be ripe for the Republicans to take control of both the Senate and Congress.
Posted by Canadian at 11:07 AM on May 7
I will write in a candidate for POTUS (Tancredo/Hunter) or I will vote Constituion Party (Baldwin is dead set against amnesty). Most likely Constitution party since a strong showing by a 3rd party would validate the need for a conservative party (the GOP lost that tag long ago).
I will not support mcamnesty. My reason? If mcamnesty gets elected, he will be the defacto Repub candidate in 2012 (if he is still alive). So we either get 8 years of liberal mcamnesty trying to ram amensty down our throats and calling us biggots if we oppose, validate the GOP drift leftward on issues, or we get a socialst democrat in 2012. Either way we will get hosed. If mcamnesty does not win the election in 2008, we will have a socialist lib to deal with for 4 years, but we would have the chance to put a real conservative up for the 2012 election (if the GOP wises up, which I doubt) or that will be more time for real conservative 3rd party to arise. Just my take on things. Supporting a 2 party system that is either socialist (dems) or left of center (GOP) is no longer palateable for me.
Posted by at 11:17 AM on May 7
Posted above:
“Far as I can make out, the only positive outcome of Shoutbamalama becoming president, is that the country might repeat the experience of NYC in the early ’90s. Back then, sophisticated, urbane, ultraliberal New Yorkers thought that it would be the sophisticated, urbane, and ultraliberal thing to do to vote for David Dinkins. Turning over the keys to America’s #1 city to a benign-appearing elderly colored gent — whom Jackie Mason hilariously compared to “a washroom attendant” and “a fancy schwartzer in a moustache” — seemed like a good idea at the time. But come re-election time — after the Crown Heights riots (and oh-so-much, MUCH more), prolonging the pain no longer seemed like such a good idea.”
Same thing happened in Minneapolis in the mid-90s with Sharon Sayles Belton. She was a total disaster. Black crime exploded and the city became known a Murderapolis. Minneapolis voters went back to a white man after Belton. He’s a liberal and black crime is still a problem (isn’t it always) but it has been contained.
Posted by Civlized Neighbor at 11:42 AM on May 7
IMHO it doesn’t matter who wins. The next US president will also be the last US president. In effect, Americans are about to choose their own Gorbachev (in Hillary’s case, Gorbachev in drag). People are now more bitterly divided over a wide range of issues than at any time since the War of Yankee Aggression. I firmly believe that had 9/11 not occurred, the breakup of the US already would have. All that post-attack flag-waving “unity” was the proverbial mile wide and inch deep.
I know a lot of folks here simply can’t wrap their minds around the idea of “the former United States,” but they need to ASAP. All empires eventually fall, and the Yankee Empire, like its Eurasian counterpart (the USSR) is no exception. Most of us acknowledge that the federal government is the greatest threat to our lives & liberties; therefore, its collapse can only work to our advantage.
A couple of weeks ago I did something I should have done long ago — I attended a concealed-carry training class at the local gun range. Those classes used to be held monthly; now it’s weekly, and according to the instructor, every one is full. Much of the interest is due to the 2005 “stand your ground” self-defense law, but you can bet that plenty of others see the handwriting on the wall and are preparing for the battles to come. IOW, they’ve cast their lot with the guy who, after the Cincinnati riots of a few years ago, vowed that in the event of an encore, “those black neighborhoods will never be the same again.”
Posted by Strider at 11:53 AM on May 7
SandyCSA wrote
“Black rule has murdered more people percentage-wise than whites rule ever has. Obama will continue the trend.”
For god sakes woman, I guess you’ve never heard of WWII?
Fed Up wrote”
“The practical ANSWER being to own and carry a handgun. If you find yourself in a potentially sticky situation, pull it out and let them know messing with you has a blood price… THEIR’S!”
Absolutely, positively wrong! As an ex law-enforcement officer let me tell you you don’t ever pull out a gun to wave it around. Your street level black thug has had guns pulled on him before and may have taken a bullet or two. Unless you are ready to kill somenone, and face the consequences, don’t own a gun; period.
I have a question to ask all of you. Is there any real possibility that Obama could be worse than the clown we’ve had for the past 8 years?
Posted by Johnny Paycheck at 12:03 PM on May 7
“Well, this is what the Amren community could be working on addressing. The problem is that many people here appear to be virulent racists who compare human beings to cockroaches and other pests.” Inkpaduta
Just who has made this argument? I don’t recall anyone comparing blacks to cockroaches or vermin. We are an open forum, and allow most reasonable and non obscene or invective laced postings. As far as saying Obama is a Muslim, I only recall one or two posters making such a ridiculous and totally false comment. You are obviously creating a “straw man” opponent to knock down with such disingenuous criticisms.
Are you a Native American? Do you believe in blood guilt and the sins of the fathers visited on the children? I really don’t buy your argument that we as whites are responsible for any actions of our ancestors. Besides, many of us are descended from Ellis Island immigrants who never murdered Indians or owned slaves.
Yours are the same arguments many blacks use for handouts/affirmative action citing racism and the legacy of slavery. I’m sorry as someone who has never owned a slave; I don’t owe anything to someone who never was a slave. I feel the same way about Native Americans, I never fought them or killed them, I personally owe them nothing as a group.
Posted by Sardonicus at 12:10 PM on May 7
I.E. calling Obama a Muslim when he told you he was a Christian 50 times. You can’t have a dialogue with that.
Posted by Inkpaduta at 3:13 AM on May 7
From ‘Dreams of my Father’, “In Indonesia, I had spent two years at a Muslim school”
“I studied the Koran..”
From ‘The Audacity Of Hope, “I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”
Feel free to slink away again Inky.
Posted by Danny at 12:12 PM on May 7
Posted by Inkpaduta at 3:13 AM on May 7
We are well aware of the “atrocities” committed by western nations, they’re only thrown in the publics face every chance possible, and its the fact you are so assertive on focusing on that that leads to blindness.
Western countries are far from the only ones committing atrocities, you addressed sandy as needing to do her math, but she did bring up points you never really refuted, in fact, all you did to “refute” was point out “well western countries do bad things too!” something we hear endlessly about to begin with, so lets venture into her argument that you never thought to really do anything about.
It is true there is unparalleled rape and murder in these african nations, do you actually contend the US’s rates are anywhere near their own? if so, i ask politely to stop living under that rock.
Zimbabwe, South Africa, etc. All black owned, are rife with murder rape and disease. These same nations, were doing at least moderately well under white rule, with these very same problems at lower rates. Does this mean i advocate whites ruling these nations? personally, no i do not. what i do advocate however is these black nations taking responsibility for their own blunders. Just like “whitey” is always racist, he also seems to be always to blame for anything, no matter if hes there or not. This is racial reality, that they screwed things up for themselves, yet in the heavily politically correct world we live in, the blame is shifted to whites, where it stays because of white guilt, false or not.
Onto my next point, you believe the American Indians have a right to this land, Alright then, let me ask you , what is your opinion on Reconquista? If the land is yours, and the Mexicans believe it is their own, then whose right here? Or is it perhaps you think its for everyone except “evil whitey”, in some false rainbow coalition?
Now onto this historical “white pride” privilege. Here we meet our conflict, here in Amren, we believe in racial reality, the concept that down to the genes, races tend to be different. You need only scroll up the list of articles on the homepage, to see one pertaining to this. what you view as “privilege” has often nothing to do with such a thing. If a certain race commits more crimes per their proportion than another, then it isn’t “whitey” ‘s inane “privilege”, its simply a fact of life. (One among many pieces of evidence here: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm )
Crime wise, there is no such thing. Now if you are speaking socially, whites preferring whites. Than you are a hypocrite.
You obviously prefer fellow American Indians to others no? blacks sure do with other blacks, and so on. So you can cut the “its evil” malarkey, thats part of the very double standard we are here to end, the very one you knowingly or unknowingly support, and that my friend, is part of the true problem in this society.
You speak of “no one up for a dialogue”, but in truth, we are, its what we are doing now. But we cannot be blamed if you dismiss truth as “racist” then proclaim we “don’t listen” when we don’t believe in false doctrine that on this forum has been exposed dozens of times.
There is nothing wrong with our will to preserve ourselves, and if defending that is “evil” than i suppose i am.
Posted by Stuck in No Mans Land at 12:26 PM on May 7
Sorry, JOHNNY PAYCHECK, I disagree.
You pull a gun on a would-be assailant, you have to be committed to using it. You have a story thought out well in advance: You were accosted, in mortal fear of your life by the thug(s). You shot believing it was the ONLY WAY to save your own life (or loved one). The anti-gun mentality you’re pushing is made to order for the bad guys in our society. I’m surprised you think that way, claiming to be an ex-law enforcement professional.
If you have a squeaky clean background, and you do SHOOT, claiming to be in fear of losing your life, with the wounded or dead perp having a lengthy police record, you’ve got a reasonable chance of convincing the jury it truly WAS self defense.
NOTE: I am NOT, have never advocated vigilanteism. But I carry, and I feel in today’s lawless society, you would be a damned fool NOT to arm yourself, Black punks and thugs being what they are. The average Black punk would stab or cut your throat in a New York minute. My precept: Never show a gun unless you are prepared to use it. If you do shoot, put the hits in the body — abdomen or chest. You can always claim you were trying to wound him with a leg hit; but he lunged at you. I feel if you have to go down, do your damndest to take the bad guy(s) with you.
YES, OBAMA would be worse than the clown we’ve had for eight years. GWB is just a tool; taking his orders from Cheney and friends, and from a foreign country, we’re told, is an ally of ours.
Posted by Fed Up at 1:04 PM on May 7
Sometimes people have to take a stand against anti-white racism, even if that stand is only in the voting booth. A vote for Obama is taking a stand against the Appearance of white racism.
Posted by at 1:40 PM on May 7
As an ex law-enforcement officer let me tell you you don’t ever pull out a gun to wave it around.
Somehow I don’t think merely “waving” a gun around is exactly what Fed Up had in mind.
Your street level black thug has had guns pulled on him before and may have taken a bullet or two.
More to the point, the street level black thug is armed, and that means he has an automatic advantage over those who are not. Speaking only for myself, I’d rather that be one advantage he doesn’t have over me.
Unless you are ready to kill somenone, and face the consequences, don’t own a gun; period.
I’ve never pulled any of my weapons on anyone, and would be mightily happy to live out the rest of my days without doing so. But you’re right about one thing: should the unthinkable ever occur, and one is forced to defend self or family or home, you only draw the weapon if you mean to kill the target. Don’t get me wrong, I figure your post was probably more of a statement against firearm ownership in general. But I guess even a broken watch is right twice a day.
As to your reply to Sandy CSA:
WWII was an example of war between nations, not of tyrannical white rule, which I believe is what SCSA was referencing (Sandy, correct me if I’m wrong). You’d have done better to point to Stalin’s Russia as an example of mass murder and oppression under white rule, but even that would be debatable when you look at the persistent state of so much of Africa and indeed black-controlled areas all over the world. As to whether the same would exist here under Obama, I doubt it, given the overall make-up of the nation as a whole.
Posted by BW Sam at 1:52 PM on May 7
There have been MANY things which “should’ve” woken us up- Affirmative Action, Immigration reforms of the 60s, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, OJ Simpson, 9/11, Jena 6, White Flight, Zimbabwe, South Africa,… the list goes on and on. Yet none of them seem to have done it. I don’t particularly agree with this Rocky Balboa strategy of “lets win by letting them beat up even more on us”. Only works in the movies. I think much of white America is already awake, but is robbed of being able to collectively bargain or question the progressive ideology, because to do so labels them a racist (regardless of whether or not they are actually saying something bad about another race, or defending themselves against real racism), and they can lose their jobs or suffer other consequences. This won’t change regardless of who the president is.
I don’t believe for one second that even if there was a black president, that minorities would stop whining that they are not receiving equal opportunity because they are not achieving as much. There have been plenty of black mayors, governors, other blacks put into positions of prominence and power (probably because of whites who bought into the Kumbayah nonsense), and nothing has changed. Most blacks still cannot achieve on merit, and still will not be able to in the future, so the need to blame whites and receive privileges will still be there. They also increasing are “justifying” things like Affirmative Action on a reparations-based ideology - making up for “past injustices” (never mind of course the role of blacks in slavery).
One commenter above pointed out the problem of Supreme Court Packing. There would be innumerable others, as well, because Obama is aligned with the liberal Democrats whereas McCain is aligned with the more conservative Republicans. This often determines what actually happens during a presidency more than what an individual candidate claims in their platform.
At the very least, you should show your disregard for BOTH candidates by writing in someone like Ron Paul or Tom Tancredo.
Posted by Student at 1:53 PM on May 7
Of course, some have recognized this almost from the beginning of hte Obama campaign. I noted some time back that if Obama wins, there will be celebratory riots, if he loses, there will be riots by those feeling the system conspired to defeat the first black president due to his race. I may have been using irony to illustrate the point, but now it is being articulated in full, as in this article. Whatever happens for years into the future, it is going to be a wild ride.
Posted by Whiteplight at 2:16 PM on May 7
McCain will go out of his way to prove he is not a racist and in doing so may well do more damage to whites than even Obama is capable of [doing]. His administration will be full of minorities, and he will continue the war in Iraq with its resultant drain on the treasury and on American lives (mostly white)…. he will be all that is bad about Bush, mixed …with Nancy Pellosi. He will permanently destroy what is left of the Republican party… so we are left with a meaningless write in, not voting, or voting for one of the major three .
Time is running out, and Obama may well serve as the catalyst,… in sparking a real revolution. He may unintentionally be the savior of the white race in America.
I personally detest Obama … but Obama is looking better and better all the time for reasons he will never understand.
Posted by at 7:19 AM
Interesting comments, like all of the aove. Yes, we shall see. Some argue this, and some argue that. But no one has come up with the definitive answer. The bottom line is that no one knows. It’s like predicting whether it will rain next week, or will it shine. I wish I knew. Only time will tell.
The only thing I do know is that the selection being offered to us is appalling.
Posted by Wish-I-Knew at 2:38 PM on May 7
“I will write in a candidate for POTUS (Tancredo/Hunter) or will vote Constituion Party (Baldwin is dead set against amnesty). Most likely Constitution party, since a strong showing by a 3rd party would validate the need for a conservative party (the GOP lost that tag long ago). I will not support mcamnesty. My reason? If mcamnesty gets elected, he will be the defacto Repub candidate in 2012 (if he is still alive).”
11:17AM
Interesting reasoning. Although despairing for the present, you are looking ahead. Out of frustration, I too will favor a 3rd party. I am less than thrilled with all the positions of the Constitution Party. But that doesn’t really matter. They’re not going to win anway, so ANY party will do, just to demonstrate my revulsion for the present rigged system and the need for another party and a new approach.
Posted by at 2:51 PM on May 7
“My precept: Never show a gun unless you are prepared to use it. If you do shoot, put the hits in the body — abdomen or chest. You can always claim you were trying to wound him with a leg hit; but he lunged at you. If you have a squeaky clean background, and you do SHOOT, claiming to be in fear of losing your life, with the wounded or dead perp having a lengthy police record, you’ve got a reasonable chance of convincing the jury it truly WAS self defense. “
- by Fed up
Maybe in Texas (where you appear to live). Ever heard of a certain brave shooter named Bernie Goetz? (He shot, and the rest of his life has been ruined. It would have been cheaper to give them the $5.) Johnny Paycheck was right.
PS. What will you do if your perp. has a gun also? And when he’s prepared for the crime, while you are taken by surprise? Or if there are 3 or 4 of them, against one of you (which is very likely)? Do you walk around with your hand on your gun 24 hours a day? You’re living with a false sense of security. Enjoy it, because you’re kidding yourself.
PPS to Fed UP: No offense. I disagree with your gun position, but your final paragraph was on the money!
Posted by at 3:13 PM on May 7
Inkpatuda:
It seems that you want to just exterminate white people. Maybe not outright but by telling us that we cannot preserve our culture and heritage and have to give up land that we fought and bled for. The Native Americans have their place and many of them do very well. I grew up in Oklahoma and that state is pretty much run by native Americans and some of the richest people that live there are Native American and they take care of their own. Europe would not be able to absorb all the White people if we were kicked out of the North American continent. I for one would fight to the death to prevent that from happening. If Obama is elected I am sure that he would implement laws that could turn this country into Zimbabwe pretty quickly. I would not be surprised if slavery reparations were implemented too.
Posted by Spartan24 at 3:49 PM on May 7
“calling Obama a Muslim when he told you he was a Christian 50 times. You can’t have a dialogue with that.”
Posted by Inkpaduta
— — — — — — —
I infer, from various clues in your writing, that you are American Indian. And very possibly part white as well. So I can appreciate that, inevitably, you have a unique point of view.
I understand what you mean (about Obama). But you have over-simplified this issue. You’re looking at it as merely an either/or situation (is he or isn’t he?), when it’s considerably more nuanced. No matter what Obama claims to be now, he began life as a Moslem. I think that many people’s concern is that he will still identify with Moslems. (And he has even said that he will.) The fact remains that he had a Moslem father, and a Moslem step-father, and went to a Moslem school, had Moslem training, and has Moslem relatives. Whether he is presently a practicing Moslem is therefore somewhat irrelevant.
As for his supposed “Christianity”, his affiliation with that Black-Marxist church (the largest in Chicago, I understand), seems designed to ingratiate himself with Chicago’s black electorate and win votes, and is an obviously shrewd political alliance — which has paid off handsomely.
A further concern which people have is that, according to Islamic law, there is no such thing as a former Moslem. Once a Moslem always a Moslem — no matter what he may say otherwise, whether it’s for convenience or whether it’s true. They are also permitted to lie about it for the purpose of furthering Islam. Should people not be concerned? If he were truly an apostate from Islam, the Moslems would screaming with rage and would have a fatwa on his head. The curious fact that they do not, and that they are murmuring not a whimper against him, seems to say something, which makes many people uneasy.
Thus, the question of whether he is presently a Moslem is somewhat irrelevant. The real question is with whom he identifies and where his sympathies lie.
Posted by browser at 4:03 PM on May 7
White folks should be advised to vote for a third party candidate.
Posted by Marcia Mae at 4:25 PM on May 7
“You pull a gun on a would-be assailant, you have to be committed to using it.
Fed up, if you’ll re-read my post, this is exactly what I said. You do not pull a gun on a ghetto-dweller to scare him. There’s a good chance he will not be totally scared. This leads to scuffles and you may loose the gun. A gun is a deterrent to a drunk white guy outside of a bar, but you don’t pull a gun on a hardened ghetto criminal without emptying the clip. Period.
As far as Obama is concerned; It is still the US congress that makes and ratifies laws in this country. I read all of this mania about reparations and African Aid and giving the country away to the blacks, but that is plain hysteria with roughly 500 of 535 members of congress being white. Obama is a somewhat marginal small-time politician without the connections of the Bush crime family. He would be in ineffective yet FAR less harmful president then Bush, Clinton, or even McAmnesty.
Posted by at 4:35 PM on May 7
Look at Obama’s dismal support in the primaries. Only a third of White Democrats cast a vote for him. He’s able to win big in Southern states because 50% or more of Democrats are black in these states! If you were a part of the liberal establishment and sensed possibly the biggest defeat since the Carter re-election fiasco, wouldn’t you spread the “worse is better” idea to get out the vote?
Posted by at 4:56 PM on May 7
You have to look at who is behind Obama. He is going to be the figure head but they are the ones pulling the strings. The same goes with McCain and Hillary…who is giving them money…who are their advisors. Obama is less likely at least to get us in a war with Iran then McCain. They all are in favor of illegal immigration. It is up to the people to stop that.
Posted by at 5:25 PM on May 7
An Obama presidency could be dangerous. What if some idiot shoots him?
We’d never hear the end of it.
The anti-white Propaganda Machine has been running on fumes for some time now. A dead first black president could be just what it needs to get back on track.
Posted by James at 6:41 PM on May 7
I personally consider those who vote for Obama uninformed race traitors. Obama has made promises and statements he cannot possibly keep even as president. Anybody that knows anything about our political system realizes this.
Posted by at 8:07 PM on May 7
Posted by The Incredible Shrinking White Man at 7:55 PM on May 6
ISWM you expressed very well some thoughts i have about this. The Stinkins Administration brought in such absurdities as Hazel Dukes, head of the NY NAACP being appointed head of the OTB. The first thing she did (as the city and nation was in a recession) was to give all “People of Color” a raise. In no time at all she bankrupted the bookie organization.
You also bring up that it is a gamble, and that too is how I feel. It is rolling the dice having Obamalamadindong being the next president. A LOT of damage can be done, plus with the white population of this country incredibly shrinking, this may be the tip of the iceberg, things can get unbelievably worse.
Finally, this fool just does not deserve to be elected. Not even for Dog Catcher.
Posted by S & GS at 8:58 PM on May 7
Those who think that Obama will be some kind of “blessing in disguise”, will know the feeling of sliding out of the gutter and into the sewer, when this mulatto demagogue hits his political stride, when he’s in power. Wakeing-up white people about anything is most difficult with the mainstream media in enemy hands, and they will surely spin Obama as the new ‘black’ J.F.K. in a new, misty-eyed colored Camelot. McCain is also the kiss-of-death for whites, so vote your conscience, and vote for Chuck Baldwin.
Furthermore, as Anglo-America disintegrates into a Balkanized disaster, under any of these so-called candidates, keep your powder dry, you’ll need it! White America has lost its racial soul and its will to survive, so it’s going to be a battle royale when the house-of-cards comes unglued.
Posted by Arnold at 9:57 PM on May 7
If I could discern the lesser of the two evils I would vote for that person but I really can not see which one would be worse. I will be writing in Ron Paul. If there is no paper ballot, I will vote for any libertarian on the ballot. If I cannot write in Ron Paul and there is no libertarian on the ballot, I will exercise my right not to vote.
Posted by ex-liberal at 10:12 PM on May 7
“PS. What will you do if your perp. has a gun also? And when he’s prepared for the crime, while you are taken by surprise? Or if there are 3 or 4 of them, against one of you (which is very likely)? Do you walk around with your hand on your gun 24 hours a day? You’re living with a false sense of security. Enjoy it, because you’re kidding yourself.”
Classic Brady Campaign rhetoric; in other words, as JPFO puts it:
Bend Over, Here it comes again!
And now you exactly WHY Chicago, New York City, Detroit are what they are vis-a-vis street crime.
Be helpless, be happy!
Posted by at 10:14 PM on May 7
Strider—-congrads on finally getting your concealed carry permit. It is a necessary first step. The time to stock up on weapons is now with the likelihood that our central government under Obama or Hillary will be intent on making gun purchases more and more difficult.
There is a very large gun community in this country of which I am a member—interestingly it is overwhelmingly white which is a very good thing.
Always remember that CWII is just around the corner and be prepared to defend yourself and yours. Reread the book if you haven’t read it. Take a look at the trends that are mentioned in it and compare them to what you see around you.
Posted by at 10:17 PM on May 7
“An Obama presidency might wake up a few whites, but at the cost of doing irreversible damage to this country (an amnesty for 20 million illegals, which unfortunately Clinton and McCain also favor). Let’s face it, most whites can’t be woken up.”
WR the elder
——————-
Not until there’s no more groceries in the house, and the house is about to go too. The masses have been too passified and stupified with TV, sports, and celebrity news. When it all grinds to a halt, as it’s eventually bound to do, then (despite Oprah) they’re going to HAVE to wake up.
When the new neighbors next door have the job they used to have, and the blasting mariachi music is driving them mad, and they can’t find another job because they can’t speak Spanish, and their kids are getting beaten up in school every day and the administration won’t do anything about it, and their wife is afraid to go out to buy groceries that she can’t afford anyhow, and the house and car are about to be repossessed, then maybe they will wake up.
If not, then they’re gone beyond reviving.
Posted by at 10:28 PM on May 7
An Obama presidency could mean that America crashes and burns.
A McCain presidency will mean that America continues dying the slow but sure death we’ve been witnessing under Clinton and Bush.
I’d rather crash and burn with Barak Obama than die a slow, painful death with John McCain.
That’s my opinion. I hope I’m wrong.
Posted by DP at 10:33 PM on May 7
“There is a very large gun community in this country of which I am a member—interestingly it is overwhelmingly white which is a very good thing. Always remember that CWII is just around the corner and be prepared to defend yourself and yours. “
And when they’re dropping napalm on you from helicopters, and you’re surrounded with tanks, good luck with that pistol you’ve got hidden in the basement!
Posted by realist at 11:31 PM on May 7
It’s almost a sort of “biological” or “racial” mindblindness that many Whites seem to suffer from.
I’m sure some of you have noticed this.
Posted by Smash The Multicultural Illusion! at 7:46 PM on May 6
Absolutely! But, I have to say this….
For example, I come from a large family. Big Irish Catholic Clan; and though I am the ONLY one who is openly White (that sounds funny ;) by sisters have all married Irish Catholics, none of them every even considered dating anyone other than a White man. Thank god.
My brother and I were both going out with Asian women (by total conincidence). And one day I realized, as she and I were getting very serious, that if I was going to have a child I would want one that was White. I never really thought of it as much as I did during that time. So I told her. She cried and I definitely did not feel good about hurting her feelings. I still care for her and am happy that she is doing well today. But, I have to add this. She never ONCE brought up the word “racism”. And her mother spoke to me shortly after and said she was sad that her daughter and I had broken up, but she got it completely. They were Japanese after all, and they have no problem identifying with a decision like the one I had to make. But since then I have never given the idea of a mixed race child another thought. Whereas my brother already has a son from his marriage. In that case, I would not want to interfere because though I think it’s important to be racially aware I think that the freedom to choose is even more important.
Posted by La Dolce Vita at 11:50 PM on May 7
What are our choices?
1. John McCain who is the last gasp of the Republican Left.
2. Barack Obama who is the first breath of the post-White Democratic Left.
What is the future of American politics?
I think all REASONABLE people can agree that the “good old days” of non-racial Republican politics are OVER.
If John “Open Borders” McCain is elected he is going to look pretty ridiculous quoting MLK and talking about how the only true conservative is “colorblind” conservative. He’s also going to look very, very, very old while doing this.
We will benefit more from him being president.
I’m voting McCain.
Posted by Smash The Multicultural Illusion! at 12:20 AM on May 8
‘An Obama presidency could be dangerous. What if someone shoots him?’
I had been thinking that if Hillary is Obama’s vice-presidental running mate, she might have Obama assisinated. She wants the presidency BAAAAD! Look at what Bill side-stepped. I’m sure she would be able to side-step the assisination of a presidential candidate.
Posted by at 12:30 AM on May 8
To the whites voting for Obama who think that some good will come from the bad choice of his presidency, don’t think that you’re not betraying yourself.
Posted by at 12:39 AM on May 8
Isn’t this exactly how Ian Smith’s fine country of Rhodesia (“The Bread Basket of Africa”) gave way to Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwe?
In the name of God, explain to me exactly HOW?!?! Obama IN ANY WAY can be better for America?!?!
If your idea of Progress for America is Mogadishu circa 1992, then a vote for Obama is a step in the right direction.
I suggest everyone go watch “Black Hawk Down” again and change the date and the names and places to American ones… then you might have some idea of what an Obama vote WILL mean in the long-term to this country.
Posted by Argonauticus at 5:58 AM on May 8
‘An Obama presidency could be dangerous. What if someone shoots him?’
Good God, this would be the worst possible outcome. Do you want to create another national martyr? Obama is deluded not evil. No, if Senator Obama is elected, let him serve as president in peace. I think with the problems we face and his solutions, he will only serve one term.
Posted by Sardonicus at 7:49 AM on May 8
Other than keeping the war in Iraq going, McCain will do everything the Democrats would do, only at a slightly slower pace, and with the approval of the GOP. Look at these other articles about “The Bigot in Your Brain” and so on, how Whites are reflexively racist, how we get uncomfortable around Blacks even if we proclaim ourselves to be anti-racist. The leftists are absurd in their solutions, but accurate in their observations of the racial attitudes of Whites, including liberals. When people hear the footsteps of tyranny and White extinction behind them, we want them to turn and see, not a genial old White man like McCain, but the spawn of Islamo-Africa and a self-hating White slut, B. Hussein Obama.
Posted by Schoolteacher at 2:10 PM on May 8
Sorry to disagree with those of you who figure THE OBAMINATION (Obama) to be the best of the worst… but that would truly bring the destruction of our America for all times.
Obama embodies ALL that which we despise Clinton AND McCain for, in addition to all his own bad baggage — which is far from an inconsiderable amount. He IS a Muslim (even if he claims to have “changed”). Can he really be trusted? Me, I would rather trust the proverbial used car salesman’s claimed honesty.
He IS Black — to the point of all but denying his White heritage. Which tells a thinking person volumes about the man.
He IS inexperienced and probably quite naieve, politically speaking. Trust OBAMA with our foreign policy? He’d make a bigger mess of it than our Village Idiot, G.W.B. did — although the Village Idiot had HIS strings pulled by another country, a supposed ally of ours.
I would rather vote for the Devil himself rather than Obama. With damned sound reasoning and urge EVERYONE to vote for anyone other than PHONY OBAMA.
Posted by Fed Up at 3:41 PM on May 8
“I would not want to interfere because though I think it’s important to be racially aware I think that the freedom to choose is even more important.”
Posted by La Dolce Vita at 11:50 PM on May 7
Freedom to choose fair enough, but only as long as it doesn’t adversely affect the existence of others like the genetic survival and social well-being of a whole race of people, ie, one’s own ethnic kin, for example.
Let’s face it, if enough members of our race were to take such an attitude, we’d inevitably be on the road to extinction in double quick time, without a shadow of a doubt.
Posted by A Swain at 3:47 PM on May 8
The way I see it “The Republican Right” currently HATE McCain for all the ALMOST right reasons. Four years of McCain coming into their living rooms every night will teach them the RIGHT reasons to HATE him.
The racial consciousness of whites will naturally grow stronger as time passes. Only Obama could alter this inevitability.
McCain is our best choice.
Posted by Will at 3:55 PM on May 8
“And when they’re dropping napalm on you from helicopters, and you’re surrounded with tanks, good luck with that pistol you’ve got hidden in the basement!”
Consider the convoy system during World War II; it’s success depended upon the application of Operations Research: How many ships can the enemy destroy utilising U-Boats in the time the convoy was exposed to enemy fire?
Now consider the number of helicopters and tanks the US military
has at the command of an Obama regime. Compare that to the total number of armed civilians; if only 10% of the population decided to engage in armed mayhem, is there ANY way Obama could control ANY area that decided they weren’t going to stand for his rule?
Americans would make what the insurgents are doing in Iraq look like kid’s play.
Remember, Americans have already engaged in armed violence to secure an election post-World War II, the celebrated “Battle of Athens.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_%281946%29
See the movie:
An American Story
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103673/
Join the Revolutionary War Veteran’s Association:
http://www.appleseedinfo.org/
so you can become the SCARIEST people that an Obama Regime would fear:
Skilled Rifleman
Posted by at 4:57 PM on May 8
to realist: first they have to find me in order to use their helicopters and tanks; a pistol in the basement is not what I intend to be armed with in any case; following your logic, the sheep should behave themselves on the way to the slaughter house; it does not take a large segment of the population, well armed(which does not mean tanks or helicopters), to paralyze a conventional military with advanced technology; defeatism is not a strategy and failure is not an option. There are actually many individuals in this country who take the 2nd amendment very seriously—they will be the ones to effectively resist tyranny.
Posted by at 5:30 PM on May 8
If you’ve ever visited any of the pro Hillary internet forums, you’ll see a lot of whites who have just recently become racially conscious. It started with some of Obama’s campaign tactics and then hit hard with Rev. Wright. I can imagine some of those posters finding their way to AmRen. These are people who until very recently were liberals with liberal views on race. They wanted blacks and whites to get along and be friends. But Obama’s candidacy, with help from the mainstream media, has deeply disillusioned them.
Posted by at 7:26 PM on May 8
La Dolce Vita,
That’s weird because I dated a Japanese girl in high school and had a similar experience.
My brother, my sister, and even my cousins are like your sisters. All of them “listen to Dave Matthews,” watch White movies and shows, live in White neighborhoods, only have White friends, only date Whites, and…sigh…love Obama.
They’re basically these people: http:www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bIcIamhhTk
“Racially conscious,” but in a totally unconscious way. Which tells me that only their “unconscious minds” seem to know that they have “ethnic genetic interests.”
Posted by Smash The Multicultural Illusion! at 9:25 PM on May 8
“Racially conscious,” but in a totally unconscious way. Which tells me that only their “unconscious minds” seem to know that they have “ethnic genetic interests.”
Posted by Smash The Multicultural Illusion! at 9:25 PM on May 8
Yep. It’s what I call “The Great Disconnect”.
Their ideal is disconnected from the real.
In fact, I would say that this is THE defining attribute of the Liberal/Left/Neocon Leviathan.
Dream - DREAM - of Egalitarianism while living like a Dictator in as many areas of your life as possible.
Talk the Talk of Compassion, while Walking the Walk of Contempt for your fellow man.
Talking about the Poor as the Salt of the Earth, while pinching pennies to live High on the Hog.
etc. etc.
Oh, and an important, very important, part of this whole Way of Life, is to Fly Off the Handle with a Knee Jerk Reaction whenever anyone calls you on it.
Posted by La Dolce Vita at 10:24 PM on May 8
“Americans would make what the insurgents are doing in Iraq look like kid’s play. Remember, Americans have already engaged in armed violence to secure an election post-World War II, the celebrated “Battle of Athens.” “
Skilled Rifleman
Well, good luck to you with that stash of ammo in your basement. I mean that sincerely. Really! I am on your side. But I remain a skeptic.
There may be a few determined resisters like you. But how many? The great mass of the American sheeple - despite all the discrimination, and crime, and provocation they have endured, for half a century now - thus far have shown absolutely NO inclination to resistance. They gripe to the neighbors and write letters to the editor, nothing more. They don’t even take action at the ballot box! They continue to elect the same traitors to office.
Furthermore, the forces of the Fed. govt. do not have to ferret out and destroy ALL of you (even assuming there were many). They would make an example of a few (eg. Waco), broadcast that on national television (as they did with Waco), and let that be a lesson to the rest. Most of the rest would cave right in.
Posted by skeptic at 2:05 PM on May 9
‘An Obama presidency could be dangerous. What if someone shoots him?’
Good God, this would be the worst possible outcome. Do you want to create another national martyr? …. if Senator Obama is elected, let him serve as president in peace. I think with the problems we face and his solutions, he will only serve one term.
Posted by Sardonicus
. ————————————
You’ve misread him, I’m sure. I don’t think he “wants” any such thing. I don’t think he’s in any way SUGGESTING that. He’s just presenting it as a scary possibility. If such a thing were to happen, the country would see black riots such as nothing we’ve ever seen before.
Posted by at 2:39 PM on May 9
[Obama] is inexperienced and probably quite naive, politically speaking.
Trust Obama with our foreign policy? He’d make a bigger mess of it than our Village Idiot did — although the Village Idiot had HIS strings pulled by another country, a supposed ally of ours.
Posted by Fed Up
I wonder how the string-pullers will manipulate Obama. As you say, he is inexperienced and naive. That is all to their benefit. Apparently they expect to have no problem with him, as he would not have gotten this far without their tacit approval.
Posted by at 2:54 PM on May 9
“I would not want to interfere because though I think it’s important to be racially aware I think that the freedom to choose is even more important.”
Freedom to choose fair enough, but only as long as it doesn’t adversely affect the existence of others like the genetic survival and social well-being of a whole race of people, ie, one’s own ethnic kin
Posted by A Swain
— — — — — — —
I am very strongly in favor of protecting personal freedoms. But as the Greeks said, “All things in moderation.” While I agreed initially with Dedalus’ position on preserving freedom, I have to agree even more with Swain’s position on preserving the race.
Which one takes precedence? Silly question! There simply is no question.
Where there is a choice that must be made, there has to be a racial loyalty and sense of social responsibility which will take precedence over any personal freedom to do whatever one wishes. The well being of the entire community - the race - must ALWAYS come first.
Posted by browser at 3:11 PM on May 9
Without a doubt…..WORSE is BETTER…..the WORSE, the BETTER.
No matter how the election turns out, it will get WORSE….THANK GOD. That is exactly what we need before we can get BETTER. Make it WORSE, in any way you can.
I am not certain which candidate will make it WORSE faster than the other two. But I do know, that not many of our Federal military are willing to oppose the American people for the likes of Obama or Clinton. Make it WORSE enough, and our own military won’t be used against us…..they will JOIN US.
Posted by Memphomaniac at 9:49 PM on May 9
I must say that I am disgusted by some of the logic being used here and some of the reasons given in this article on why white nationalists want to support Obama. What is Jared Taylor doing praising Obama’s campaign strategy? What is there to praise?
I am also not happy with the excuse dealing with the war. I sympathize with some white nationalist arguments against the war, such as “we should be protecting our own border”. I sympathize with that sort of statement fully actually. What I don’t understand is why so many in this movement are so quick to side with the liberals on this issue as if they are our comrades.
You guys don’t seem to understand that the liberals are against the war for the most vile reasons such as “whites are evil imperialists who cause destruction wherever they go”. They are NOT against the war for the same reasons many of you are. They DO NOT have your interests at heart.
If it was an intelligent white male liberal running saying that we need to put the troops on our own border, then I could fully understand the reasoning here. But why support a corrupt and incompetent black man who doesn’t know anything about foreign policy just because you are against the war?
Sometimes the rational used on this website doesn’t make sense to me. I WON’T be voting for Obama, and I am proud to say that. I guess many of you on this website feel that it is best to chop your entire arm off just because one of your fingers aren’t functioning properly.
Posted by Courtney at 2:02 AM on May 10
I am very strongly in favor of protecting personal freedoms. But as the Greeks said, “All things in moderation.” While I agreed initially with Dedalus’ position on preserving freedom, I have to agree even more with Swain’s position on preserving the race.
Which one takes precedence? Silly question! There simply is no question.
Where there is a choice that must be made, there has to be a racial loyalty and sense of social responsibility which will take precedence over any personal freedom to do whatever one wishes. The well being of the entire community - the race - must ALWAYS come first.
Posted by browser at 3:11 PM on May 9
I like this post browser, because it touches on a lot. But since we can’t get into “a lot” in a post, I’ll just mention what I think is important to keep in mind.
First, I was speaking for myself, not for anyone else. Second, though I do agree with you in part, my commitment is not so much with Whites, or with Freedom, my number one commitment is to Reality. And the reality of our, and I think everyones, situation, is filled with some unpleasant facts. And those facts MUST be faced SO we can preserve our Freedoms, our Peoples, whoever they may be, etc.
I will make a personal statement to help illustrate my point.
I am one of many children fathered by a man who apparently exhausted all of his courage fighting the Japanese in World War II. He was decorated for his bravery, but when he came home, “Class of 46” as they were called, he proceeded to act out the symptoms, not only of PTSD, but also, of what he experienced before leaving for Japan, while growing up, ie; Multi-Generational Abuse and Neglect. There was NO langauge for either that or the PTSD, and since life is impossible without explanation, a shamefully neglected Intellectual and Cultural point I plan to base my website on, the lack of explanation, or its complete absence, only added to the trauma.
So, you have Physical, Intellectual, Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Spiritual trauma of the first rank, that is operating like an undiagnosed disease ripping at the core of our collective psyches and tearing the fabric of White society and everything Whites, Jewish or Gentile, control. The case with my father ended with him abandoning a house full of children and not contacting us again until 30 years later and to utter a “on his way out the door” apology before dying. He lived the life of an irresponsible coward. And, as any honest White person knows, my father is one of literally, and we know this, MILLIONS!!!!!
AND YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT GROUP SOLIDARITY!!!!!!
How, when you fail to take the above in to account?
How far do you expect to get?
Are you even being serious, or sincere?
Also, if there is anyone who wants to fire off a cheap shot at my personal experience, go ahead. You will only prove me point! The people who visit and comment here and talk about group solidarity are DELUSIONAL, they are certainly wasting their time. Plus, there are plenty of people from all walks of life who have been screwed over – BY THEIR OWN! They too are finding it hard to be “loyal”. But the MSM is not interested in them. But then, neither are you guys, or most of you!
The theme of Violation runs through a huge part of OUR History, Violation of Ourselves, of our sons and daughters and brothers and sisters. The quantity and quality of information we have is overwhelming, but it is also gathering dust for the most part and that should be a burded on the conscience of ALL Whites and Westerners of the Judeo-Christian-Secular-Humanist Tradition. That it isn’t speaks to the absolute CORE of our problem. For every second you ignore this you are wasting your life; but to ignore it and then wax philosphic about Solidarity is to whistle in the wind blowing through the window of your room in an Insane Asylum.
Posted by
