Michael Scherer, Time, November 24, 2008
{snip}
In an extended interview with TIME, Davis [Fred Davis III, the advertiser whom John McCain has used for almost all of his campaign media] detailed what might have been in the campaign ad war—and what self-censorship the McCain staff imposed on themselves regarding the issue of race. {snip}
“My favorite ad of the campaign was as simple as it could be,” Davis said. “And it started out something like, ‘Long before the world knew of John McCain or Barack Obama, one of them spent five years in a hellhole because he refused early release to honor his fellow prisoners, while the other one wouldn’t walk out of a church after 20 years of the guy spewing hatred towards America.’ And the last line was, ‘Character matters, especially when no one is listening.’” The ad never ran, however, because McCain ruled the topic of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the preacher of Obama’s Chicago church, out of bounds shortly after he locked up the Republican nomination.
Good advertising men are almost always mischiefmakers at heart, the sort who don’t mind a little confrontation and who revel in a bit of controversy. And so Davis is wistful at the missed opportunities of the McCain campaign. “I made a list once, which no one will ever see, of all the reasons that my hands were tied on this campaign,” he says. “And I’ve never had a list this long.” One of his biggest struggles, Davis says, was to come up with negative spots against a historic, groundbreaking candidate without stepping on taboos. “One of the big hands that I felt was tied behind my back was [that] so many things—like [Obama’s record on] crime—you would logically do were perceived as ‘Oh, we can’t do that. That was playing the race card,’” he says, adding that the campaign created a whole series of crime attacks against Obama that were never aired. “Reverend Wright? ‘Oh, can’t do that; they’ll say we are playing the race card.’ [William] Ayers? For the longest time, ‘Oh, can’t do that. We’re playing the race card.’”
Davis says that concern about race played a major role in the entire aesthetic of McCain’s ads. The photographs of Obama that the ads used, for instance, which often showed Obama elongated and smiling, were carefully selected, he recalls. “We chose them with only one thing in mind, and that is to not make them bad pictures because bad pictures would be seen as racist,” Davis says. “How many shots in their ads did they use a John McCain [photo] looking decent and smiling?” He says the campaign also agonized over the music in the ads, paying special care not to play drum-heavy tracks that could be seen as an African tribal reference. “We were held to a totally different standard,” he says.
Nevertheless, the McCain campaign was unable to escape the charge that it was playing the race card. An Associated Press analysis called the campaign’s invocations of the once violent 1960s radical Ayers “racially tinged” because they evoked the word terrorist. McCain was also accused of playing on race for running an ad that highlighted Obama’s relationship with Franklin Raines, a former executive at Fannie Mae who is black. Says Davis: “I never saw anybody play the race card but the Obama campaign.”
{snip}
Original article
(Posted on December 1, 2008)
Comments
I have never been fond of Karl Roverrated. I think George W. Bush won two national elections in spite of Roverrated, not because of his advice. What solidified my opinion was the 2006 midterm R losses. Now, Fred Davis, a Rove protege (Rove was himself a Lee Atwater protege), admits to flubbing the Jeremiah Wright issue.
Of course, the McCain campaign in Missouri sent out slick mailers advertising the evils of Bill Ayers, but they couldn’t do the same for Wright. Easier to pick on a white terrorist than a radical black preacher.
Lee Atwater, the political father of Rove and grandfather of Davis, would not have hesitated to use Wright.
I have said for years that poliical correctness will be the death of this country. If any negative or condemning truth ever stated about a minority candidate is labeled racist, then they have clearly won before the race ever begins.
Utterly disgusting. McCain has the same problem as many holier-than-thou Whites who wear nobility as a badge of their deplorable egalitarianism.
Allow me to make a couple of points:
First, I don’t think McCain or his top tier of “supporters” ever intended for him to win. He was merely a placeholder for the RNC. This was always about Obama winning. McCain engaged in political point-shaving. Even with the assumption that he was attempting to win, consider how poorly he managed his campaign.
This was a blinding glimpse of the obvious. We were all painfully aware that the McCain campaign was holding back on the huge treasure trove of ammunition to use against Obama. Where is Lee Atwater when you need him? Where is Newt Gingrich? Where are the admen who made Richard Nixon a salable commodity in 1968?
This campaign is another case story along the lines of Michael Dukakis’s disastrous bid in 1988. Everyone knew the campaign could have done better, but the plays that would have made the difference were vetoed by the candidate. This is detailed in Taylor’s book “All by Myself: The Unmaking of a Presidential Candidate.” The same book could be written now about McCain.
William Ayers is a white man who was a co-founder of the Weather Underground, an organization that planted bombs. Why have we come to the point where calling such a man a “terrorist”, which he was, is now denounced as “racism”?
McCain deserved to lose, but Obama did not deserve to win. The two party system is worse than useless, because it gives most people the illusion of living in a democracy.
The very most important negative concerning Obama was the vile anti-white racism by his Preacher and his fellow congregants who applauded, whooped it up and were absolutely gleeful everytime an anti-white phrase or word was used.
Had McCain brought this hateful black attitude to light, this would have been an opportunity for the country to reveal black racism once and for all which would have lessened black/white tensions by making every other future anti-white statement less likely to occur by holding blacks accountable for their racist, evil attitudes, and I’m pretty sure Obama would have lost.
But I really believe McCain would make a worse president than Obama. He’s a war monger, and he is for all the social ills Obama embraces.
We’ve had another presidential election and another disgusting choice of candidates. But it looks like we might be saved by an economic implosion so great, it is as the Russian professor said, we are going to split apart.
This country is no longer functional and has run its course in its present form.
If the GOP isn’t running a dinosauer like Bob Dole, George Bush, or John McCain, they’re trying to get the black and Hispanic vote with tactics that alienate their base. They wind up getting hardly any black/Hispanic votes abd losing 5 or 6 million socially conservative whites.
Stupid is as stupid does. I think their tactical team is headed by Forest Gump.
Giving Obama a pass on his relationship with people like Wright for fear of being labeled “racist” did McCain about as much good as pandering to hispanics when it comes to immigration. In the end Republicans are still going to be smeared as “racists” and “anti-immigrant” no matter how much they grovel because this is what the Democrat party does best demogogue and this strategy has succeeded very well for them. Republicans would be better off standing up to the likes of La Raza, the NAACP and all the other leftwing,anti-white racial groups and driving home the point that the Democrats are hypocrites when it comes to race in this country.
“Davis says that concern about race played a major role in the entire aesthetic of McCain’s ads. The photographs of Obama that the ads used, for instance, which often showed Obama elongated and smiling, were carefully selected, he recalls. ‘We chose them with only one thing in mind, and that is to not make them bad pictures because bad pictures would be seen as racist,’ Davis says.”
And what did that get McCain? Nothing in the end and clearly this article (and the election) demonstrates that point.
I am very sad to say, that the one and only prediction about this election that I got 100% correct, was that McCain might lose it by being too concerned with looking “respectable” (i.e., not “racist.”) Obama was and remains an inexperienced mulatto fool; he is so inept, that at one point he remarked that he had been to “57 states” during his campaign. For this he was given a pass by the Marxstream media and that old idiot McCain as well. Never, was it even insinuated by anyone (outside of the talk radio and other “alternative” media) that this was a shocking display of ignorance on his part.
Indeed, the “savior” simply stated that he was “tired” and had a slip of the tongue and of course this was accepted as holy writ.
Unlike Sarah Palin, who was only running as the understudy, but had every aspect of her: person, qualifications, and gaffs lacerated with invective and contempt. Moreover, McCain’s judgement was consistently called into question for picking her, because after all, it was inferred that at 72 he must be going senile for not realizing that he could die at any moment and this brunette “Caribou Barbie,” might wind up being the Commander-in-Chief.
Here is a good montage of the Red feeding frenzy on that point:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnSS0dEv-RQ
Particularly illustrative are Bill Maher’s asinine remarks (the man who thought that the 9/11 terrorists were “brave”)that Governor Palin would not be able to fill in the names of the countries on a blank map of the Middle East. Could his “savior,” Comrade Obama, have done the same with a map of the USA, including the extra seven states he once claimed existed besides Alaska, Hawaii, and the other one he still had to visit?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws
Yes, McCain lost because he couldn’t play the “race card,” but had no problem with his (and this country’s) most unscrupulous internal enemies playing the age card against him and indulging in anti-white sexism against his running mate.
As always, God help us all!
Who was it that said, “I’d rather be right than president”? Apparently John McCain would rather be “gentlemanly” than president. The various attacks mentioned in the article, all of them legitimate, would have given him a much better shot at winning, even WITH the September financial meltdown. But, NO! We can’t say that! They’ll say we’re playing the race card!
If they’re going to accuse you of playing it anyway, then why not just go ahead and play it? No general ever won a battle by fighting it by Marquis of Queensbury rules.
The whole campaign was a phony from the start. Economically, the Republicans knew what was coming and didn’t want any of their brighter candidates to be stuck with a depression like Hoover was. McCain was the sacrificial lamb for the party. Obama will be stuck with this mess, and if we have to depend on the Democrats to get us out of it, this depression will last as long or longer than the previous one. Neither party gives a damn about this country. All they want is the power to control our lives. We are in for a long rough ride that will change this once great nation into something unrecognizable.
I honestly believe McCain either was willing to lose on purpose, or he was set up by the elite to lose. The way he ran his campaign was stupidness incarnate. McCain is a down and dirty type when it comes to shoving amnesty down the throats of Americans for millions of illegal aliens, with subsequent chain migration of millions more of their relatives. I find it extremely hard to believe he was not willing to get down and dirty with his campaign against Obama, because he is basically a “nice guy”. No, something else was at work here.
It was an ad campaign which is only rivaled in stupidity by that of Bob Dole. With their twisted sense of ethics, Republicans would rather lose than win. Fine. Let them lose. I’d prefer liberal Democrats to liberal Republicans any day. Just a matter of taste.
“I made a list once, which no one will ever see, of all the reasons that my hands were tied on this campaign,” he says. “And I’ve never had a list this long.”
Is there any better proof that McCain supremely deserved to lose this campaign…and lose BIG? In fact, McCain winning this election would have been the worst thing that could possibly have happened, because it would have falsely reassured the GOP that their current pandering strategy would ultimately work.
In reality, under McCain’s logic, no white candidate can EVER win against a non-white—because it can always bee seen as “racist.” McCain’s fatal mistake was thinking that when it comes to an outright race war (which this campaign was), you can win by taking the “high road” That has never worked for whites and never will.
Let’s hope the next GOP presidential nominee comes out swinging.
This is the primary reason the republicans are finished as a party. They are (or rather were) the white person’s party. However, they had no interest in representing white issues. Over the last decade, they competed with the democrats to see which party could disenfranchise whites more. It finally became too much and most whites abandoned the party. Whites simply do not see any way to solve this nation’s problems through democratic means. And in typical white fashion, are preparing for the hard road ahead. That’s why there is such a huge spike in gun sales.
I highly doubt that a third party, dedicated to whites, will rise to take over for the republicans. For whatever time the US has left, the democrats will control the entire government. They will do this until they decide to institute an amnesty and dissolve our southern border. That will lead to seccession and could lead to the bloodiest civil war the world has ever seen.
It’s been a long time coming….whites against the race traitors. Those terms won’t be used in the beginning. But they will quickly come to dominate what that war will be about. Blacks will likely be forcibly migrated to the southeast. The southwest might be given over to the mexicans, mostly because there is no other option….for now. And the rest of the US will become a white nation….a RACIST white nation. Race treason will earn a person a quick trip to the gallows forever afterward. It has simply cost us too much to ever be tolerated again. The next 50 years or so will be one long quest to reclaim the parts of the US that we lost.
Did McCain really act like he wanted to win?
No.
The people who voted for Obama BELIEVE universal racial love is achievable. Anything that McCain did that hinted at racial division would have emboldened supporters and strengthened their resolve to rid the US and the world of racism.
Only time will tell how the Obama presidency will play-out.
I also noticed that this article — despite being somewhat sympathetic to the racial double standards the McCain was unfairly subject to — manages to TWICE mention not wanting to connect Obama to Ayers for fear of RACIAL repercussions without mentioning the irony that Ayers is a WHITE man.
So: You’re not allowed to connect Obama to black supremacist Jeremiah Wright for racial reasons…
And you’re not allowed to connect Obama to white terrorist Bill Ayers for racial reasons…
Why doesn’t the media come right out and admit that they love The Messiah so much they’re reluctant to to connect him to ANY undesirable individuals OF ANY RACE?
Team Obama and the PC media put Team McCain in a stranglehold. And now, thanks to them, Obama’s got America in a stranglehold with a filibuster-proof administration.
It’s enough to make even an Atheist like me join in the chorus of “God help us all!”
McCain was chosen by the republican party to lose to Obama. The republicans didn’t want to win this race. It was the communist party’s turn to destroy this country. The democrats and the republicans can go to Hell. We, the working people of the middle class will suffer the consequences of bush and obama. Amerika is dead on arrival. Blow taps. Let’s start forming a couple different countries from the ashes of Amerika. At least, we may have learned a few valuable lessons from the destruction of the once great country that we now live in. Separate by race and ideaology. Whites with whites and blacks with blacks and hispanics with hispanics. It’s too late to try to boot out all the illegals. Give them their own piece of the rock. AND KEEP THEM OUT OF WHITE TERRITORY.
Really pathetic.
The Rockefeller Republicans, Jack Kemp Republicans, John McCain Republicans would rather lose elections, then ever dare utter a word, or think a non politically correct “racist” thought that would violate the strict social standards of the Ivy League, NY Times/Washington Post, Beltway world that they want for themselves and their children.
Here’s hoping the entire McCain campaign, GOP pandering elite, losers get stuck in New Orleand during the next hurricane.
Amren readers should understand that not all the White victims of terrible Black murder and mayhem were innocent victims. For many, it was racial karma for a life of pandering and losing.
So the gutless McCain refused to raise legit issues against his opponent for fear of being called “racist” and he ends up losing and being called a bigot ANYWAY by liberals.
George Bush Sr, Lee Atwater and Jesse Helms had no problem compaigning on racially-charged issues (affirmative action, Willie Horton) and that’s why they won unlike this p.c. sissy.
It’s high time the Republicans listened to a Democrat hero: “We have nothing to fear but fear itself.” This is expressed even more aptly in the excellent quote of Thomas Jefferson used on AmRen (See top of page).
Rev Wright ads ran frequently in the last 2 weeks of the campaign. I am not sure what this author is on about.
McCain didn’t deserve to win and I just wish he’d take his tired ole self back to Arizona. He reminded me of George Bush sr. looking at his watch while debating Bill Clinton. McCain didn’t want it. And who could blame him. But at least, if you’re going to run, go for it with gusto.
We have come to a place that PR means whites aren’t allowed to say anything that may be deemed racist, yet if we substitute the word black in Rev. Wrights sermons he would be arrested. It’s illegal to have a White European College fund, NAAWP, or NAWW. It almost makes me sick to see the college scholarship roster and some of the categories they have. This country has had an influx of immigrants from around the world, but the African influx has created such a problem for so many years, it almost tore this country apart with a civil war. When are we going to say enough?
It is not merely the McCain campaign which censors itself on race. Below are some comments, also germane to the general topic of this article, which I posted earlier today on the so-called ‘conservative’ takimag.com online magazine, as commentary on a recent article by Prof. Paul Gottfried, an occasional AR featured speaker, discussing “post-paleoconservatism”. They were referred to by a number of other blog-commenters, then mysteriously vanished from the site before day’s end. Why?
______________________
Here are the comments takimag felt needed to be deleted (let readers speculate as to why):
I find it strange that Prof. Gottfried looks forward to a “post-paleo” Right, yet fails to explain what was wrong with paleoconservatism, at least ideologically. Assuming that Gottfried still is a paleo, but, now speaking politically, believes that his fellow paleos have themselves abandoned what was correct in the movement’s earlier manifestations, why does he advocate post-paleoism, rather than a restoratio of whatever he believed was correct about the original paleoism? Perhaps all of this definitional parsing is not especially useful.
It would have been more instructive for Gottfried to have provided a ‘first principles’ discussion of the nature of the true conservatism which he presumably still advocates. With such a foundation, we could then evaluate Where To Go From Here (something I have been agitating for as a blog commenter for many years now). If you’ll excuse the ad-speak, if we don’t know where we’re going, how will we know how to get there?
Let’s get that ball rolling. I suggest that the first principle of any real (American) conservatism is the preservation of the numerical hegemony, as well as blood purity, of the white race in America (though ultimately any American conservatism inevitably shades into global white racialism). Do you agree, Professor?
_______________
I wish Prof. Giottfried or the other, much less erudite ‘solons’ at takimag (or even any of the blog commenters who ‘just can’t handle’ racial realities straightforwardly expressed) would at least attempt to answer the questions I posed above (some implicitly).
What is/was paleoconservatism? Was there something wrong with it philosophically, or only pragmatically? Was it different from ‘traditional conservatism’ ideologically, or only historically/sociologically?
What is “post-paleoism”? Does it have a philosophical core, or is it merely a collective term denoting those on the contemporary Right hostile to the neocons, but too young to have waged that particular battle in decades past?
What is conservatism? More precisely, what is conservatism, especially today, when the failures and hypocrisy of racial integration + ‘diversification’ through immigration are increasingly evident to intelligent whites, at least conservative ones, if not racial conservatism?
Note to the risible ‘anti-racists’ here: racial conservatism is NOT the same thing as racial nationalism (though I advocate both, the former philosophically, the latter strategically), nor does racial conservatism conflict with other aspects of the broader conservative ‘mind’ or agenda. Indeed, a NON-racial conservatism is ultimately unintelligible, or perhaps is, at best, a cover for some variant of biblical fundamentalism.
For what does it mean to be conservative? Sam Francis somewhere expressed it best: Conservatism is the defense and preservation of a particular people, and its historic institutions and culture (within boundaries, I would add, of some ultimate metaphysics, which in our case is supplied by Christian natural law).
But what is the foundational aspect of particularity? It is biological differentiation; ie, preservation of cultural and historical particularity begins with maintenance of 1) blood purity, and 2) numerical (and later political) hegemony, of (in America and the West) the white race.
That the West begins with a racial foundation does not imply that only race matters, or that some mindless white tribalism is the appropriate political strategy for conservatives. It means only this: the West is white, has a moral right to maintain itself as white, and will not survive as a civilization if whites do not first maintain the purity of their collective genome, and second, their numerical preponderance within their historic polities.
Conservatism begins with race, but no racial conservative argues that it ends with it. But we are nearing a time when the literal genomic perpetuity of our people is in doubt. Therefore, the true conservative being alive to the vagaries of history, we put first things first. We start the renewal of our civilization at the base, which means attending to race first.
____________
An addendum:
Ultimately, these semantic discussions, so beloved of intellectuals like Gottfried, are really irrelevant. Similarly, the attempt to create some non-racialist, anti-neocon conservatism, that is neither simple libertarianism, nor Christian reconstructionism, is not merely intellectually doomed to incoherence, but politically futile.
As I have been arguing for years, conservatives can rally to either Religion or Race. Those are the ‘ultimates’. Men are roused by hopes of heaven, and by the call of blood.
It is true that libertarians also oppose much of the Left’s agenda, but they have their own historically and intellectually well-developed ideology. Those self-styled conservatives who primarily oppose Big Government or wish to preserve capitalism are really libertarians (perhaps culturally conservative ones in some cases). Libertarianism is philosophically incapable of defending conservative particularities.
As is Christian conservatism. Those conservatives who primarily oppose the Left’s hostility to pre-1960s traditional (Christian) moral and socio-sexual values are really either (Protestant) Christian reconstructionists, or else some archaic type of papal supremacists (if they are intellectually coherent, carrying their assumptions to their logical conclusions). The ‘moral values’ crowd has no arguments, within its own Christian ideology, against racial integration (at least if uncoerced). From a conservative perspective, the politicized Christians are at least a bit better than libertarians insofar as they do oppose Muslim immigration, if out of religious and not ethnocultural supremacism. Remember: the Church is a universal institution. It offers nothing in the way of defending cultural particularities (though, I argue, it does not disallow conservatism, either).
Unfortunately for the Christians, they are pretty much ‘maxed out’ today. Christian fundamentalist ideology (whatever sect) appeals to certain mental types, and repulses others. While I expect such Christians to be with us always (for the indefinitely forseeable future), and indeed, to grow more prominent over time, at least among whites (insofar as they are the family-centered people having the most children, and most people are not critical thinkers, but derive their core beliefs from their parents, esp when those beliefs are strong and foundational, as is the case here), there is a limit to political Christianity’s appeal. Most Americans who are convertible to theologically conservative doctrines have already made that leap.
No, whether the CHRONICLES and takimag crowds like it or not, the future of the Right will increasingly be racialist. That is where the ‘growth potential’ is. There exists an enormous gulf between the pronouncements of the occupationist regime, and the lived reality of whites. There is also an enlarging political gulf. In the recent election, EVERY minority group, including Jews, voted overwhelmingly for Obama: Asians 2-1, Hispanics 3-1, blacks 95%. Non-Jewish whites, however, voted 57-43% for McCain. Given that whites are the American old-stock, and least ethnocentric group (ie having built the country, and therefore it having been ours for so long, we are the least ‘minority conscious’ group, the insiders not outsiders), the charisma of Obama, ineptitude and unattractivenes of McCain, deep dislike of Bush, and the huge financial implosion in the final stretch of the campaign, it is extremely significant that a clear majority of whites STILL
As the objective political (and later economic) position of whites continues to erode, while minorities in league with the regime still persecute and blame whites for their own problems, does anyone really think that white nationalism is NOT going to assume a greater prominence? White nationalism speaks to issues of real injustice, and it offers real solutions (ie, let’s organize politicaly to protect ourselves, our property, and our country), based on a simple but REAL, non-ideological quality (yes, skin color).
I’ve said this for years, but I’ll say it again: we racialists are going eventually to take over the conservative movement (I hope by marginalizing the extreme Christians, confining the hard edged fundamentalists, whose bleak, rule-bound vision of social existence is unattractive even to many conservative Christians). We will have to be cagey about it, muting the ‘white pride’ types, and emphasizing the facts of white victimhood (as Jared Taylor has done vis a vis unnecessary neo-Nazis). But that it will get done is inevitable, as long as existing demographic and political trends continue.
The real ‘post-paleo’ movement, Dr. Gottfried, is white conservatism or nationalism.
Can’t help but believe if they had fully unleased Palin and did it early, it certainly would have been a closer race. And maybe a different outcome.
But I believe that the ultra liberal McCain really did not want Palin, but knew he needed a gimmick (woman) and a conservative for the base. He never seemed to like her.
Democrats attacted the whole campaign and McCain played goody goody. It helped him lose.
The Republican party elites allowed the media to choose Mccain as the nominee, he has very little in common w/real conservatives, conservatism will win, its proven over and over, as much as I like S. Palin, she is not a real conservative.
I believe that William Ayers is Jewish, so they would consider that “playing the race card”. Republicans were set up to lose by their own party. Why? McCain was the worst choice and they knew it.
The GOP is a sniveling bunch of cowards and got what they deserved. Now they want to “reform” their image? How? By pandering even more to Asians, Blacks and Hispanics. Now anyone who keeps saying that Asians are more “like us” is a fool. ALL minorities will band together against the White race of this nation and this election PROVED it. So what is the GOP solution? Pander and appease even more minorities.
Just listen to the neo-con talk shows and you will see what I mean. They still claim it isn’t about race and that they would vote for Condi, Powell or Walter Williams in a heartbeat if given the chance. They don’t get it and never will. The GOP is a lost cause for White America. Any caller who dares to mention race and says any truths is quickly silenced. Just listen to Billy Cunningham, Alan Hunt, Rush, O’Reilly, Sean, or the rest of them if you don’t believe me.
Native Born White Americans will either politically organize around their legitimate racial interests or they will become an ever dwindling racial minority within the borders of America. And when this happens, they will be violently oppressed by blacks,hispanics,asians and muslims.
No more of the liberal even-handedness nonesense of Roy Beck and numbersusa. It is bad enough to get this nonsense from the Republican party. It is unacceptable to get this from an immigration reform organization. If an immigration reform organization is not openly pro-Native Born White American, do not financially support them.
posted at 2:O2
War,Death and Destruction are at the core of Evangelical Christian theology. If Southern Eveangeleical Christians get their wish, and the US starts a war with Iran, there will be large scale death and destruction in the Middle East. Thousands of America teenagers will die over there, and the human species will be brought to the brink.If we some how manage to survive all this, the Southern Evangelicals will be thouroughly discredidted. I suspect that thier own children will turn on them. I beleive that it will only be at this point in time that the transition from Fundamantalist Christian moral conservatism to White Racialism will take place. White Nationalism is very compatible with some aspects of Paleoconservatism.
White Nationalism will have a bright future in America when Evangelical Christians break their addiction to wars of aggression .Once this happens they will no longer give their allegiance to the Republican party. Sarah Palin is the “goddess” of death and destruction. She is America’s Shiva.
as steve sailer said, Mccain was accused of racism ANYWAY. no matter WHAT we do we will be accused of racism, so why care?
McCain as we all know, was worse than useless- the neocons running his campaign have such utter contempt for middle america and for anything the republican party stands for other than bombing Iran.
McCain was probably geniunely shocked his media buddies turned on him -he was too dumb or arrogant to realize the only time they supported him is when he was fighting other republicans…once he stood in the way of the ‘revolution’ and ‘hope and change’ he was doomed.
And we all are. the ground has just shifted. Not being racist will no longer be enough under Boss Obama, you must PROVE your ‘anti racism’ in the manner that white liberals do.
In the same way that Arnold Shwarthzenagre had to visit a holocaust memorial to prove he is not one of ‘those’ austrians, we’ll all have to do some similar act of submission/penance.
Barack Hussein as our(?)president - elect is an ” Obama-nation ” unto itself for the following reasons : Will not provide concrete evidence that he is an American citizen, attended for twenty years at an anti-white, anti-American Christian (?) church, very little experience on the federal level, he was fast-tracked as an ” affirmative action quota ” minority, his anti-white, anti-American wife; also a benefited by her minority blackness status, that is, lower the ” bar ” on intellect and grades for Princeton U. and jobs in Chicago.What a fraud and a shame politics and the courts have devolved into over race and its anti-Whiteness since Brown vs. Topeka.
“The people who voted for Obama BELIEVE universal racial love is achievable. Anything that McCain did that hinted at racial division would have emboldened supporters and strengthened their resolve to rid the US and the world of racism”.
I would tend to disagree with that. Virtually every move the multiculturalist make is racist against whites. There’s nothing more racist than the diversity agenda and no one more racist than the ‘anti-racists’. Simply because they have a universal green light to be that way, doesn’t change what it really is.
I have to admit that McCain’s campaign made me a little less apprehensive about him as a man, but what I am not likely to ever forgive him is that he has wasted Sarah Palin.
He should never let her go to the interview with that buffoon Charlie. And once he did let her go, she should have been prepared to fight back rather than try to please the sinister interviewer (which she has been so good at).
Somehow, Obama was always interviewed first by people who were openly sympathetic for him, so why McCain had to send Sarah to a hostile anchor first?
It was a gigantic lapse of judgment on McCain’s part.
McCain was chosen by the republican party to lose to Obama.
Posted by at 10:58 PM on December 1
No, McCain was chosen by the so-called “mainstream” media to lose to Obama.
Here is more on that subject:
Loser McCain
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/1703
My own theory is that somewhere around the beginning of October McCain and his minions realized that the campaign was a lost cause, and so cut a deal as follows in order to help McCain salvage his senate seat in 2010: Obama picks Gov. Janet Napolitano for a cabinet post, thereby eliminating McCain’s strongest challenger for the seat. With a lightweight like Rep. Gabrielle Giffords as his opponent, McCain cruises to an easy win in a year in which the GOP loses yet more ground in Congress.
>>One of his biggest struggles, Davis says, was to come up with negative spots against a historic, groundbreaking candidate without stepping on taboos.
What exactly are those taboos, who established them, and SHOULD they be “stepped on”?
Or is it now taboo even to ASK such questions? Ä
McCain.
The candidate that didn’t want to win.
All these posters who are predicting the imminent breakup of the U.S. (many of whom couldn’t even predict the Obama win) make me laugh. In order to have a breakup, you have to have white awareness, and where is the white awareness? If there were white awareness, Obama wouldn’t have won in the first place. Besides, most whites probably think nuclear weapons (something the secessionists never think about) are a bigger threat to the future of mankind than race mixing, and maybe they’re right.
The Republicans are completely worthless. I don’t think they even have a real function anymore.
Well, other than motivating and legitimating the extreme left.
Kicking that old Hornets’ nest once or twice a decade with their stupid biblical homophobia and lame Judeo-Christian moral crusades.
If you’re going to beat the tidal wave of liberalism sweeping from the disillusioned underachievers of this country, you’ll first have to stand for something better than what they promise and make them look ignorant.
You can’t attack them directly. They’re dug in. “Racism” means hating someone for not being like you, and we’ve all experienced that from others — and it hurts. They think emotionally so that’s 100% badthink. You have to stand for something, and not mention what stands in the way — just eliminate it with peaceful, legal means.
Jared Taylor is correct when he calls for the elimination of racial preference. Let people associate with, and live by, who they want to live by. I don’t consider myself a conservative or a racist so much as I consider myself an anti-pluralist, or someone who recognizes that nations are held together with consensus on values, heritage, language and goals.
McCain needed to launch a positive campaign. He was correct to realize a negative campaign would degenerate. But he offered nothing for people to cling to, so he got portrayed as a Bush-alike. Most people — wrongly, blindly and as a result of emotional tantrums not analytical logic — dislike George W. Bush.
It should be obvious by now that Conservatism/Republicanism is beyond useless; it is in the way of any real changes in a White-friendly direction.
Republicans spend all their time whining about taxes and other petty issues while ignoring the real issues we face.
Republicans are actually a bigger enemy than the outright Bolsheviks on the Left. The Bolsheviks at least make no bones about the fact that they hate our guts and want us dead. The Republicans/Conservatives pretend to be our friends but sell us out every time and put the knife in our backs.
Many White people have this ridiculous notion the the Republican Party is the de facto White Man’s Party. It is anything but. What the Republicans have done to us for generations (in conjunction with their Bolshevik “opposition”) speaks for itself.
” Sarah Palin is the “goddess” of death and destruction. She is America’s Shiva.” Posted by Jupiter at 9:20 AM on December 2
It’s precisely because of people like you, who are unable to understand just exactly what is important to build a base of unity for all whites, that we have the trouble we do.
Your evaluation offers not one single bit of supporting evidence to your utterance of denigration to a woman who is on our side, and you cling to some childish, immature view that all we have to do is strongly oppose these forces against us in this country in order to regain control.
All that nonsense is pushed by you although you’re well aware that 1/3 of our population, or 100 million people, are non-white. Your childish solution to the problem is to just “kick them all out.”
Since nobody agrees with you on that, how do you propose to get adherents to your cause? It won’t be the Sarah Palin supporters who are intelligent enough to realize that she might not be all we need, but she is what we need right now.
Does that register with you at all?
Most people — wrongly, blindly and as a result of emotional tantrums not analytical logic — dislike George W. Bush.
Posted by Brett Stevens at 5:33 PM on December 2
You are totally wrong on this one, Mr. Stevens.
Bush was the one who coined the term “compassionate conservatism”. It was like transplanting the “bleeding heart liberalism” to the Republican party. Because of Bush, our Southern border is a joke, Spanish becomes the prevailing language in many most populated areas of the U.S., the other countries (and not the Americans) benefit from the American technology transferred overseas, and the U.S. economy is in the worst crisis since the Great Depression because Bush, out of his being “compassionate”, willy-nilly helped the Clinton idea to allow millions of the underachievers (mostly blacks and Mexicans) speculate risk-free (for them) on real-estate market.
And his idiotic, persistent push for the amnesty for illegal Mexicans was the most defining attribute of his presidency.
The only two presidents after WWII that were more damaging to the U.S. than Bush were Johnson and Clinton. If Carter were re-elected, he would, arguably, inflict more damage to the U.S. than Bush did, but luckily for us he was defeated by Reagan.
Also, although Bush’s Supreme Court appointees (Roberts and Alito) were excellent, he initially wanted to install there his mediocre cronies, and changed his mind after he angered his base. And least but not last, his failures and his cynical alienation of his conservative base (Rove advised him to ignore conservatives because “they” have nowhere else to go) laid ground for a victory of the most left-oriented candidate (Obama) with dubious qualifications (he doesn’t seem to have a proof that he was born in the U.S.) that will appoint several Ruth Ginsburgs to the Supreme Court, thus nixing appointments of Roberts and Alito.
Here is a link to an in-depth analysis of his failed attempt of imposing the so-called “guest” worker program that would, most likely, double the rate of illegal “immigration” from Mexico:
THE DAMAGE HAS BEEN DONE (3)http://www.americanpatrol.com/GUESTCOLUMNS/DWYER/DamageDone3-040127Dwyer.html
It is hard to believe that this greatest country that the Earth has ever seen doesn’t have better sons and daughters than Bush (and Obama and Clinton and McCain) that would be interested in seeking the U.S. Presidency.
After authentically American and unapologetically white Sarah Palin has been (politically) assassinated, I begin to understand why our election choices are limited to such mediocre candidates.
It should be obvious by now that Conservatism/Republicanism is beyond useless; it is in the way of any real changes in a White-friendly direction.
I wouldn’t go that far. Haven’t you folks heard?
http://www.gop-revolution.com/profiles/blogs/obamas-election-is-about-to-be
From their mouths to God’s ears, as they say!
Ding, dong the witch is dead, Which old which? The ****** witch.
So now suddenly Obama is a good and qualified man.
McCain has already gotten some rewards for serving as the
He’s not just a cancer survivor; he’s a cancer.
“posted at 2:O2
War,Death and Destruction are at the core of Evangelical Christian theology. If Southern Eveangeleical Christians get their wish, and the US starts a war with Iran, there will be large scale death and destruction in the Middle East. Thousands of America teenagers will die over there, and the human species will be brought to the brink.If we some how manage to survive all this, the Southern Evangelicals will be thouroughly discredidted. I suspect that thier own children will turn on them. I beleive that it will only be at this point in time that the transition from Fundamantalist Christian moral conservatism to White Racialism will take place. White Nationalism is very compatible with some aspects of Paleoconservatism.
White Nationalism will have a bright future in America when Evangelical Christians break their addiction to wars of aggression .Once this happens they will no longer give their allegiance to the Republican party. Sarah Palin is the “goddess” of death and destruction. She is America’s Shiva.”
Posted by Jupiter at 9:20 AM on December 2
Uh… yeah… put the pipe down for a minute.
There is No reason White Nationalism and Evangelical Christianity cannot go hand in hand. I am both Evangelical Christian and White Nationalist and have no conflicts.
That’s just my view. I have done plenty of introspection on my Religious, Political and White Nationalist beliefs and have not yet found any conflict of interest between the three, rather, I have found they support and uphold each other.
James.
James
White Nationalism and Evangelical Christianity will be compatible as soon as Evangelical Christians become fiercely anti-war. At the present point in time, Evangelical Christians vote for deracinated limp-wristed traitors such as Lindsay Graham of South Carolina because creatures like this are enamoured of war,war and more war.
Chuck Baldwin should run for Congress or Florida state legislature.. Stay away from the presidency,the senate and governors office. WE can take OUR country back from the bottom. Going for the presidency is a manifestly foolish strategy.
“Let’s hope the next GOP presidential nominee comes out swinging.”
Why? The GOP is as anti white as the democrats. Eisenhower sent federal troops to Little Rock and Oxford Miss to enforce school busing and affirmative action admissions at the point of bayonets in total violation of posse comitatus act.
Nixon was the worst president for affirmative action. Almost all the anti white affirmative action measures were enacted during the Nixon and Ford, not the Johnson and Carter administrations. Johnson claimed he wanted only a quota system for the 12 per cent black population. Nixon and Ford turned the quota system into a “no whites need apply system”, destroying the careers and employment prospects for all White Americans.It was during the Ford and Nixon adminstrations that affirmative action was extended to asians, middle easterners, hispanics and every non white on the planet.
Reagan ended minimal testing for black applicants to federal civil service jobs. Reagan made it possible for blacks who could not read, write or do math even at 8th grade level to hold down high ranking $50,000 plus administrative jobs in the federal service.
White nationalists need to get away from the idea that ours is a conservative position. There is not one, not one conservative organization that dares to be against affirmative action, to talk about black on white crime or stand up for whites.
Today I checked out a new conservative organization that wants to fight Obama’s projected radical laws and regulations. They had a list of about 20 conservative positions they intend to fight for. The ignored affirmative action and black on white crime.
Conservatives are not the friend of white nationalists. They are as supportive of affirmative action and black on white crime as Abe Foxman and Barack Obama.
We are not conservatives. We are radicals. Our most extreme position is that we actually believe that the 14th amendment actually applies to us.
Whites learn pretty quickly that pandering to minorities gets them nowhere.
Bill Clinton, long hailed the “first black President” was buried by blacks who deemed him a racist for not supporting Obama over his own wife.
McCain belly crawled through this election wringing his hands over whether he’d be seen as a racist. And after all his tip-toeing, he was STILL called a racist. Even by the Hispanics who he’d pandered to over the amnesty mess.
When will whites realize that they need to circle the wagons on their own kind? Blacks look out for their own. So do Hispanics. So do Asians. Whites, though, wander in circles trying to appease all the other races who don’t care about them.
Posted by margaret at 8:45 PM on December 4:
“Why? The GOP is as anti white as the democrats.”
[…]
“Conservatives are not the friend of white nationalists. They are as supportive of affirmative action and black on white crime as Abe Foxman and Barack Obama.”
Excellent post, Margaret. I am a Conservative, but it is highly improbable that I will vote for a Republican again. They’ve elected to compete with Liberals for the votes of undesirables. I’m sure they will come into power again, eventually, as watered-down moderates who talk out of both sides of their mouths.
Disgusting.
Brett Stevens: Most people — wrongly, blindly and as a result of emotional tantrums not analytical logic — dislike George W. Bush.
I’m as analytical as anyone you’ll meet and am a card carrying member of the George W. Bush haters club. What has that man ever done for the white middle class? The true paleocon (but not racialist) magazine, The American Conservative, gave an
