Dennis Cauchon, USA Today, October 14, 2009
Democratic members of the House of Representatives now represent most of the nation’s wealthiest people, a sharp turnaround from the long-standing dominance that Republicans have held over affluent districts.
A USA TODAY analysis of new Census data found that Democrats represent a far different constituency today than they did in 2005, when they were the minority in the House, or in 1990, when they were the majority.
The Democratic-controlled House is now an unusual combination of the richest and poorest districts, the best and least educated, and the best and the worst insured. The analysis found that Democrats have attracted educated, affluent whites who had tended previously to vote Republican.
Democrats now represent 57% of the 4.8 million households that had incomes of $200,000 or more in 2008. In 2005, Republicans represented 55% of those affluent households.
{snip}
The Democrats’ new coalition of extremes could cause friction on issues such as health care and tax policy because of Democratic proposals to raise taxes on affluent households.
{snip}
Democrats have virtually erased the historic wealth gap that has long defined the parties and their policies. The median household income of Democratic districts last year was just $1,180 less than in Republican districts, down from $6,793 in 1990.
Wasserman [David Wasserman of the Cook Political Report] says Republicans have tended to appeal to affluent voters since the Roosevelt era in the 1930s and 1940s but recently have appealed more to Southern and rural voters, who often have lower incomes.
{snip}
Original article
(Posted on October 23, 2009)
Comments
This was a kind of paradox in the 2004 election: Bush won the majority of college graduates. But Kerry won the majority of states with the highest percent of college graduates. Bush won every one of the 16 states with the lowest percent of college graduates.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html
“Wasserman [David Wasserman of the Cook Political Report] says Republicans have tended to appeal to affluent voters since the Roosevelt era in the 1930s and 1940s but recently have appealed more to Southern and rural voters, who often have lower incomes”
They aren’t appealing to anyone other than Rockefeller Republicans and assorted neoconservatives. The MSM reports that only 20 percent of people identify as Republican now with so many real conservatives abandoning them.
“Democratic members of the House of Representatives now represent most of the nation’s wealthiest people, a sharp turnaround from the long-standing dominance that Republicans once held ….Democrats have virtually erased the historic wealth gap that has long defined the parties “
The crocodile tears shed by these billionaires for the “underprivileged” have earned them the votes of the gullible black masses, an electorate now made larger by Mexicans and a variety of newly arrived (and welcomed) third worlders. While these white race traitors have lived their protected lives of great wealth and congressional privilege, the scorned white working class has been forced into the waiting arms of the fading Republicans who don’t really care about them either but who need them desperately. But the fact is that the expendable white working class, now being phased out, has been abandoned by both parties who see a more manipulable new electorate on the horizon. The government has elected a new people.
“Democrats now represent 57% of the 4.8 million households that had incomes of $200,000 or more in 2008. In 2005, Republicans represented 55% of those affluent households.”
I am laughing out loud, as usual, in utter abject disgust!
And was this yesterdays percentages or today’s?
Given the 2008 qualifier, I wonder just what percentage of that 57% are still indulging in the phantasmal multicultural and idiotic class-warfare paradigm now?
Time will tell, as will New Jersey and Virginia also in November.
As always (because the Republicans are just as bad, and we all know it) God help us all!
This doesn’t surprise me. George Soros is a billionaire and he’s pretty much purchased the Democratic Party. While Republicans owe their fealty to oil titans the Democrats are just as much in hock to Hollywood moguls. You’ll note that the Democrats have been just as willing to bail out bankers as have the Republicans. If Democrats were pro-labor would they favor keeping working class wages low with millions of illegal immigrants?
Neither party represents the white working and middle class. America’s dispossessed soon-to-be-minority has nowhere to go.
In addition to liberal white guilt, there is a healthy dose of hypocrisy in play here. The wealthy liberals vote Democratic to avoid being socially ostracized by their neighbors while all the while living in gated communities and private preserves inaccessible to the urban poor. The liberals support wildly expensive social welfare programs that tend to subsidize minorities, but which also keep them isolated in urban areas safely removed from the well policed districts of the elites. If the crackheads ever penetrated into the suburbs, these Democratic voters would be the first to call for the cops.
As Ron Paul recently stated in an interview; “America only has a one party system. Both the Democrats and the Republicans are part of the same system that is controlled by special interests. It makes little difference whether a Republican or a Democrat is president.” Ron Paul went on to say that he doubts that a true third party could ever become powerful enough to win elections. This is because the Democrats and Republicans have joined together and rigged the rules and conditions in order to make a viable third party nearly impossible.
Someone once said that the repubs are the party of the millionares while the dems are the party of the billionares. We need a party for the average folks.
The Democrat party has become a coalition of affluent whites and poor minorities. They are attacking middle class white people both financially and culturally.
10 years or so ago they were noticing the same thing in Britain with Tony Blair, the explanation was that once you become just so rich the lower tax promise of conservatives just doesn’t really matter anymore, and as long as the left doesn’t push absolutely confiscatory tax rates the rich don’t mind paying a little extra to buy some guilt relief and trendiness. On the other hand, it may only be a reaction to the dreadful George W. Bush and his wars as well as the equally dreadful candidate McCain.
It is also a product of our increasingly radical and destructive Universities. Multiculturalism is sold by the Universities to their students as a class identity badge, one not strictly economic, and a cheap one since neither they nor their students ever have to pay for it, as someone has already pointed out. The rich in this country, especially the newly rich (and most particularly the female newly rich) are always looking for something that sets them apart from the unwashed masses from which they and their families came and marks them as truly special, and since we cruelly continue to deny them the royal titles that they so desperately crave, they have to settle for demonstrating their innate moral and biological superiority over their inferiors (not to mention their innate right, nay duty, to rule, democracy be damned) by continuously painting those inferiors as moral lepers who are liable at any moment to break into war-crimes without the steady and FIRM hand of the anointed ones to guide them. Power tends to be fashionable, and clearly the strutting of the dominant cultural left is supplanting traditional upper class country-clubism as the thing to be seen as among the well-to-do. Still comes with champers, though.
While perusing the web I came upon this controversy in “Frontpage Magazine” from 1995 - Academic Witch-Hunt:
http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=8792
Here is the webpage of the SIUC History Department. Note the special interests of the Professors, a veritable cornucopia of political correct white-hating racism:
http://history.siuc.edu/faculty/facultyinfo.html
Republicans and Establishment Conservatives thought that that they could just ignore this sort of thing and avoid conflict and that the effect of the hundreds of millions of tax dollars poured into this type of brainwashing would be countered by the greed of the graduates, but it looks like they may have been wrong.
At least to a degree, this only reflects the widespread disillusionment with the “Stupid” ie. Republican party. Republicans and their Neocon war-mongering, half-hearted and myopic wedge-issue focus on things such as abortion and gay marriage(let’s face it - while many have strong opinions on these issues, they are NOT major factors in most peoples’ lives), their complete and even intentional failure to do anything to stop the illegal invasion across the southern border, their apparent contempt for their traditional base, etc., have just alienated many Americans who are not necessarily “Democrats” at heart and certainly not all that liberal - just utterly fed up with the other team.
I wouldn’t vote for a Democrat if they were giving away cars at the polling place - but I can certainly relate to those completely disgusted and done with the Republican Neoconmen.
As a token liberal who posts here, let me say this is perhaps the most important issue faced by modern conservatism and the Republican party. It needs a broader economic program than racing to the bottom of taxes and regulation. Today’s educated workforce wants an activist government that creates nice communities to live in, as per the ‘white city’ thread.
The Democratic party is full of contradictions. If it were not for the passage of te 1965 immigration reform act, the Democratic party-with high probablilty- would have devolved into a minor and insignificant party. The Democratic party had to import its voters from non-white countries to sustain itself. The Democratic party is manifestly the party of open treason for this reason.
But the problem for the Democratic party is that its non-white voting block is socially conservative. Over time, the socially and culturally degenerate greedy elites will be thrown over board. The post-1965 will very much want to be represented by their own kind.
The other party of race treason-the Republican party-will never represent the legitmate racial interests of Native Born White Americans. The white corporate race traitors who own the Republican party will never allow this. It is all about maximizing their greedy utility function as fast as possible. Shutting immigration down to 0 would massively interefere with thier goal of maximizing their wealth as fast as for labor became scarce, wealth and power would start transfering back to Native born White American workers. Thier biggest fear is a severe labor scarcity. So, to put it another way, the labor policy that maximizes the wealth- in as short a period of time as possible- of te white greedy cheating class requires NATIVE BORN WHITE AMERICANS being reduced to an ever dwindling racial minority within the borders of America.
A virulent pox on both the Democratic and Republican parties.
“The values of the weak prevail,” wrote Friedrich Nietzsche, “because the strong have taken them over as devices of leadership.” This brief and rather cryptic remark contains virtually all we need to know about why contemporary movements like multiculturalism, feminism, homosexualism, and anti-white racism are such powerful trends in modern American and other Western societies.
The left and right both think that things aren’t quite on the level and something’s not right so this is common ground for them. Of course I side with the right, especially on the ‘something is a-miss’ issue. Considering that conservatives and christians believe in the faulty nature of man, almost making them Darwinian in a sense, is it always so bad the public’s learned a false imagine of man by way of the media?
15 — Anonymous wrote at 12:15 PM on October 24:
“The left and right both think that things aren’t quite on the level and something’s not right so this is common ground for them.”
> But they disagree vastly on what it is that is wrong.
” Of course I side with the right, especially on the ‘something is a-miss’ issue.”
> It might be wise to divorce yourself from an automatic loyalty, since those loyalties come with a set of old-school stereotypes and thoughts that will not get the job done today. It would be better to be objective and think critically with the aim of providing a realistic scenario for the survival of the white race.
” Considering that conservatives and christians believe in the faulty nature of man, almost making them Darwinian in a sense, is it always so bad the public’s learned a false imagine of man by way of the media?”
> I wish I could make more sense of this sentence, but I would interject that the problem with Christian Conservatives IMO is that they seem to think that they are infalable. Given any opening, all they seem ready to do is put down their heads and repeat the same mistakes that caused most of the afflictions of the West.
On the other hand, the CC’s must be happy, since the NT tells them to be poor and follow the shepherd.
The rich now vote Democrat… Why is no one inquiring as to why rich whites aren’t ‘voting their interests’? and lifting up the dirty rocks poking around to shed some light on the ugly crevices of this situation? Exposing the contradiction, or the ignorance, as it were. This might be the very reason the US economy is floundering, and an unpleasant harbinger of where the markets are headed in the future. Heck, it’s probably why the housing market tanked.
Why is it that the democrat party is made up of some of the wealthiest, poorest, most educated, least educated, highest and lowest IQ people people? Almost all polar opposite’s, not to mention a collection of some of the most weird dysfunctional special interest group’s going. The republican party on the other hand seems to be made up of the vast middle of normal ordinary people. I would like to hear to hear an explaination for this.
Factors that may be influencing the elites to side with the left are opportunism coupled with their having little or no internalized value systems. There used to be (in the good old days, before my time) a significant (but not absolute) correlation between education, wealth, and responsibility. Now it appears the elites will sell out without the slightest hesitation as the greatest fear for an elitist is to be shunned out of the higher echelons of power and society.
Therefore, when Obama gathered enough top influence makers in his campaign the money just started rolling in from sources known, and sources still unknown. It was sickening to observe people and institutions caving in to avoid being left out. Even the Republican Party did not appear that it really wanted to win against Obama. The fix was in, and the elites just sold out even through there were, and are, a staggering number of questions about Obama that were never resolved, or even asked.
I think the answer there is pretty simple. The democratic party is essentially an enormous political dichotomy; an organization divided into two contradictory, yet, symbiotic, components. The wealthiest members of the democratic party derive their sense of self-gratification and moral superiority from the “assistance” of the vast underclass several rungs below them on the socioeconomic ladder, and the underclass in turn, while potentially politically more in tune with the republicans on many issues (such as gay rights, when do black people care about homosexual ‘liberation’?), ignore their actual ideological affiliations in favor of the lure of copious cash money handouts.
>>>>Jupiter wrote at 10:43 AM on October 24: The other party of race treason-the Republican party-will never represent the legitmate racial interests of Native Born White Americans. The white corporate race traitors who own the Republican party will never allow this. It is all about maximizing their greedy utility function as fast as possible. Shutting immigration down to 0 would massively interefere with thier goal of maximizing their wealth as fast as for labor became scarce, wealth and power would start transfering back to Native born White American workers. Thier biggest fear is a severe labor scarcity. So, to put it another way, the labor policy that maximizes the wealth- in as short a period of time as possible- of te white greedy cheating class requires NATIVE BORN WHITE AMERICANS being reduced to an ever dwindling racial minority within the borders of America.
That is one of the saddest posts I have ever read, but it is a true description of the real world. I am going to give you a non-white’s perspective on this issue.
When I first started reading the things that were posted by various people on this website several months ago, I was shocked by the hatred that so many white people have for non-whites. But as time has gone by, I have discovered that white people have more hatred and contempt for poor white people, than they do for non-whites.
Although I am not white, I have always been bothered by white people who use the term “white trash”, to refer to low-income members of their own race. Which other race of people in the world refers to poor members of their own race as “trash”? Who do you think is fighting for your country in Iraq and Afghanistan? Do you people really believe that unsuccessful members of your own race are no better than garbage?
There is also the equally troublesome word, “wigger”, which some posters on this site love to use. This suggests that misguided young whites who imitate black hip-hop culture, are no longer regarded as part of the white race, but are viewed as belonging to the black race and are of no use to whites.
The idea of “whiteness” is so tied in with wealth, status, and successful careers, that those who are less fortunate are viewed as less “white” than the successful whites. A race that has adopted such a survival strategy has no future, and is doomed.
I have always wondered why whites, who have so much contempt for their own poor, are always so eager to help poor non-whites, and adopt third-world babies. In the past, I assumed that whites are more altruistic than other races. But Steve Sailer has a different opinon. He said that when whites support non-white causes, they are not necessarily motivated by compassion, but by a desire to acquire status points over other whites. The good deeds are motivated by a form of selfishness.
Europe and America have no future as majority white countries. The rich white elites in both countries will never give up their quest for cheap labor and greater profits, in order to perserve those nations as white majority nations. Whites are the greediest and most individualistic race that has ever existed. Sure, they may have invented a lot of useful stuff over the past 500 years, which they flaunt as proof of their racial superiority. But it has never dawned on them that people are more important than material things, the latter being a mere illusion, for those familiar with Eastern religions. The history of the Roman empire is repeating itself, and there may be no majority white nation in the West in 200 years. Russia and Eastern Europe are the last best hope for white majority nations, if they are not corrupted by the materialism of the West.
For decades ago now, there was a mild stir created when Hugh Hefner made a monetary donation to the Black Panthers. Lots of folks asked: “why would a man of the stature and wealth of Hugh do such a thing?” Hugh and others that were LEFT but wealthy saw the Panthers and their ilk leading a revolution where Hugh and his kind would be left on the sidelines and have to make nice to survive when the “new order” became the power.
Recall too just recently the brouhaha when folks such as Buffett said we should NOT abolish the inheritance tax. Well, Warren has all the money in the world to give away and your average citizen does not. Tax of course is just fine for those that can pay and pay and not feel a whit of difference.
These guys are trying to say to the unwashed, uneducated masses:
“We sympathize with you are on your side, just keep downwind of me??” They do not really have any affininty for the “masses”, just want to stay on their good side!!
“But Kerry won the majority of states with the highest percent of college graduates. Bush won every one of the 16 states with the lowest percent of college graduates.”
And the ONLY AREA where Mc Cain did well and did better than Bush and the rest of the Republicans was in the area from Pennsylvania, WVa, Tennessee, Kentucky, down into Arkansas and part of Oklahoma. That area of the nation where the occupants mostly describe themselves as AMERICANS!! What does that say??
Many of the college educated professional people I know who have abandoned the GOP have done so because of the Iraq war. The other big issue is the GOP’s cozy relationship with Fundamentalists. Creationism and hostility to science is kryptonite to high IQ voters. The perception increasingly is that the GOP is the party of trailer trash, bible thumping ignoramuses and mindless jingoists. None of these things are part of real conservatism. Bush’s mind-blowing incompetence and inability to speak the English language are a major factor too.
Has anyone else noticed that the conservative media echo chamber is still pretending that most Americans support the Iraq war? That was the number one reason why the GOP lost the last two big elections, but the National Review and Fox News still act like most Americans think invading Iraq was a good idea. It shows how much power neoconservatives have in the the broader conservative movement that they can squelch any mention of the disastrous political consequences of their schemes.
When more than 2 out of 10 well to do Americans buys an American car then I’ll pay attention to what the wealthy as a group have to say.
DeepakNPatel,
What gives you the idea that whites consider any poor white to be white trash? After having read this board for years, I can not cite one single example of where anyone has said this. “White trash” is a mentality — it has nothing to do with income level.
“The idea of “whiteness” is so tied in with wealth, status, and successful careers, that those who are less fortunate are viewed as less “white” than the successful whites.”
Again, you’re wrong, and I ask you to cite where you’ve seen anything like this posted on this site. Not every white can be wealthy, and anyone that thinks badly of poor whites in general has the wrong idea and needs to have their head examined.
“I have always wondered why whites, who have so much contempt for their own poor, are always so eager to help poor non-whites, and adopt third-world babies. In the past, I assumed that whites are more altruistic than other races. But Steve Sailer has a different opinon. He said that when whites support non-white causes, they are not necessarily motivated by compassion, but by a desire to acquire status points over other whites. The good deeds are motivated by a form of selfishness.”
You do have a point here; these whites that are more willing to help poor members of a different race in spite of their own are after something more than altruism. In the sickening liberal mindset, helping whites is frowned upon and adopting a non-white kid is a perverted status symbol rather than goodness coming from their own heart. I completely agree with you on this, but you’re barking up the wrong tree if you think you’re going to find those kinds of whites on this forum.
“Europe and America have no future as majority white countries. The rich white elites in both countries will never give up their quest for cheap labor and greater profits, in order to perserve those nations as white majority nations. Whites are the greediest and most individualistic race that has ever existed. Sure, they may have invented a lot of useful stuff over the past 500 years, which they flaunt as proof of their racial superiority. But it has never dawned on them that people are more important than material things, the latter being a mere illusion, for those familiar with Eastern religions. The history of the Roman empire is repeating itself, and there may be no majority white nation in the West in 200 years.”
Sadly, you’re absolutely right.
#18:Why is it that the democrat party is made up of some of the wealthiest, poorest, most educated, least educated, highest and lowest IQ people people? … I would like to hear to hear an explaination for this.”
Because educated whites use denial of race differences as a sort of IQ test. Only ignoramuses think there are inherent (negative) differences in races. The mark of a smart person is the ability to explain disparities in accomplishment without them.
Whites who support the Democratic party are those that can minimize the presence of blacks in their own lives, so they can vote for an altruism-of-others. It’s been known since at least the 1988 presidential election that in states east of the Mississippi, the percent of the white vote the Republican gets is proportional to the size of the black population. Whites in the blackest states, like Mississippi, Alabama and Louisana vote 90% Republican, while whites in Vermont and Maine vote Democratic.
#24 is also right that relgiously-based ignorance is anathema to high IQ voters. Not just Creationism, but also that biblical prophesy and Armageddonism is a motive behind support for militarism in the Middle East.
On another thread, someone asked rhetorical why a liberal is interested in the philosophies of this site. It’s simple — racial fantasies ruined liberalism. If we could get back to the liberalism of the 30s-65, we could accomplish the things America did during that period.
After that, we passed anti-discrimination laws. When that wasn’t adequate to eliminate differences, we needed affirmative action, which in its original form was merely intended to guarantee equality of OPPORTUNITY. When that wasn’t adequate, we moved to preferences based on requiring equality of RESULTS to redress past injustices. When that didn’t work, we moved to diversity, which basically says you should hire minorities just because they’re part of society. When that still didn’t work, the intelligencia developed an “assumption of oppression” that says the mere facts of white existence are an oppression of everyone else. Check out the article about the University of Delaware’s diversity boot camp:
“A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e. people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture, or sexuality.”
http://www.vdare.com/derbyshire/071119_delaware.htm
To DeepakNPatel
Let me suggest that “hatred of non-Whites” you refer to is not what you think, but justified outrage over our White nation being INVADED by floods of non-Whites. Not only from Asia, but also from Latin America and Africa.
You do not understand the idea that RATIONAL people prefer a racially homogeneous nation and culture. That dilution of this with millions of non-Whites is what fuels the anger and hate you perceive. Nor is there anything WRONG with this idea.
With respect to your comment of claims of racial superiority by our having “invented a lot of useful stuff” you miss the point entirely. WE, that is the White Race gave humanity the learning, technology, science and medical knowledge making our current civilization possible! Whether you personally can bring yourself to admit this or not, if we compare what Whites contributed to the Great Pyramid, contributions by Asiatics would be like a large boulder placed alongside that Great Pyramid, with contributions by Africans represented by a grain of sand.
Of course we Whites have every right and reason to take pride in our racial accomplishments. If those accomplishments denote racial superiority, that’s fine. If that ruffles the feathers of non-Whites, that’s a shame, but reality is what it is.
“Has anyone else noticed that the conservative media echo chamber is still pretending that most Americans support the Iraq war? That was the number one reason why the GOP lost the last two big elections, but the National Review and Fox News still act like most Americans think invading Iraq was a good idea. It shows how much power neoconservatives have in the the broader conservative movement that they can squelch any mention of the disastrous political consequences of their schemes.”
I’ve noticed the same thing but what do you expect from a media controlled by our puppetmasters? I’d say there are more people noticing that nothing has changed with Iraq and the whole “War on Terror” since Obama came into office. The anti-war left has been silenced and the status quo remains.
“Has anyone else noticed that the conservative media echo chamber is still pretending that most Americans support the Iraq war? That was the number one reason why the GOP lost the last two big elections, but the National Review and Fox News still act like most Americans think invading Iraq was a good idea. It shows how much power neoconservatives have in the the broader conservative movement that they can squelch any mention of the disastrous political consequences of their schemes.”
Oh, well it looks as if Amren is starting to get taken over by the anti-Jewish Stormfront crowd (either that or by liberals). Neither group do I care much for, nor does either group do much good for our cause.
Can we stop with this divisive nonsense and just focus on the issue of race? Stop writing posts like this that belittle the millions of decent WHITE Christian “Bible-thumping” patriotic red state Americans who are a great asset to this country. Are you saying white liberals who support Obama are the better alternative?
The reason the Republican party has been doing badly is because it doesn’t stand up for the interests of whites on race issues such as immigration. You know it and I know it. Stop writing these posts that make white war heroes and evangelicals into bad guys.
Last night when I went through the posts on this website, I saw more posts that were anti-white than anti-minority (after looking through more than one article; not just this one). We don’t need this sort of attitude if we wish to get anywhere as a race.
“The idea of “whiteness” is so tied in with wealth, status, and successful careers, that those who are less fortunate are viewed as less “white” than the successful whites.” - D Patel
His other comments were generally perceptive and on the mark.
The war in Iraq along with the culture-war issues is probably the biggest cause.
Another reason: intelligent people are often attracted to ideas simply because they are seen as novel, over ideas that are traditional. For example, they will buy new and untested consumer electronics not just because they are the only ones who can afford them at first, but also because they are simply novel.
“Clever Sillies: Why the high IQ often lack common sense”http://tiny.cc/7pMP0
And finally, there are the economic reasons. People do often vote with regards to their pocketbooks. So they should vote against the democrats constant push for higher taxes…right?
Not necessarily. The top tax rates were 90% only a few decades back, but there were huge loopholes. But aside from that, people who are rather wealthy are frequently less interested in what happens to their income stream than they are concerned about the assets they hold. The Rockefellers, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, etc. are not really going to care about their incomes because even if they are taxed at an actual 70%, it pales in comparison to the appreciation of their stock portfolios. Combine this with secluded lives in gated communities, and you begin to understand why they can support “clever/silly” ideas.
After that, we passed anti-discrimination laws. When that wasn’t adequate to eliminate differences, we needed affirmative action, which in its original form was merely intended to guarantee equality of OPPORTUNITY. When that wasn’t adequate, we moved to preferences based on requiring equality of RESULTS to redress past injustices. When that didn’t work, we moved to diversity, which basically says you should hire minorities just because they’re part of society. When that still didn’t work, the intelligencia developed an “assumption of oppression” that says the mere facts of white existence are an oppression of everyone else.”
From the early 1900’s to the 60’s, liberals got just about everything they asked for. When their policies didn’t create paradise on earth, it was probably inevitable that they went from equality under the law, to equality of opportunity, to equality of outcome. Now they are utterly obsessed with the concept of equality. Really, there is nothing about liberalism that cannot be explained by a fetish for equality. Radical environmentalism = equality of species, feminism = equality of the sexes, socialism = equality of all workers, etc.
“there is nothing about liberalism that cannot be explained by a fetish for equality”.
I might argue with this by saying liberals seek the equanimity of the graveyard but I won’t. I might argue that liberals aren’t concerned about equality at all, at least when it comes to white men. In fact the only thing they ever seem cognizant of is doing over white men. But really, who cares what liberals want? They just follow along on a path designed to least likely have someone calling them a name, a bigot or a racist or a ‘redneck’ and then make up an excuse or rationalization for their path afterward. Each decade - each year - the excuses change. Who cares what they want anymore? It would be less of a nuisance if they weren’t able to tie everything good in humanity to ‘bigotry’ before making their efforts to stamp it out.
You made an excellent post, there were some other very good ones too, and, what we need right now is a uniter not a divider, but i couldn’t help responding to your post.
Deepak Patel
I think you would agree that is completely abnormal for any racial tribe to enthusiastically embrace their race replacement by another racial tribe. In American, Native Born White Americans are not only expected to tolerate their race-replacement at the hands of other racial tribes,they are also expected to subsidize their own race replacement at the hands of other racial tribes.
It is completetly normal to oppose this. It would be completetly normal for Hindus and Sihks to do the same thing in India.
I have been reading corporate publications for over a decade. Corporate elites have expressed in these publications a great fear of labor scarcities.
It is very foolish of immigration reformers to argue against immigration on the basis of labor surpluses in America labor markets. Arguing against immigration on the basis of severe labor scarcities in America labor markets is a much strong debating foundation.
Labor scarcities are wonderfull. The more severe the better.
Unless you are opposed to a high wage market for Native Born White workers. You are either for a high wage economy for Native born White American workers or you are not. If you are, to the extent that a policy of 0 immigration induces a severe labor scarcity, it would be a wonderfull thing fro Native Born White Americans
Severe labor scarcities in the past are the number one reason that Native Born White Americans achieved a high real wage. This was unacceptaqble to White Corporate elites and their puppets in the REoublican and Democratic parties. Since 1973, Corporate elites through their puppets in both the Democratic and Republican parties have revolted against economic equality by importing scab labor from asian,the carribean, the muslim world and africa. As a consequence, wealth has been transferred back to the greedy cheating class of elites.
Behind every grest fortune is a great crime.
Courtney
The invasion of Iraq and…Afgahjnistan is a major war crime. Iraq posed no threat to the America. There were was another way to deal with Al-Queda. There should have been an international police action to hunt down AL-Queda cells in America and Europe.
There is no more justification for invading Afganistan and killing afghani civilians-wedding parties, youg children and the parents of young children-than there would be for England doing the same thing to Americans for IRA terrorist attacks in England that were hatched in Irish bars in Boston.
All, that really has to be done is to shut all muslim immigration down to 0 and kick the muslims out of America. What is the justification for importing muslims into America? What is the justification for letting them stay here? Why does Native Born White America need a large and rapidly growing muslim population? Why?..Because the anti-white kenyan bigot in the white house says so?
0 muslim immigration and kick all the muslims out…and you will never have to worry about another Al-queda attack agains. What ever happened to common sense about the obvious?
About thirty years ago, Hank Williams Junior came out with a song called “A Country Boy Can Survive”, an anthem for self-sustaining rural folk. When times get tough and civilization continues its descent into squalor and poverty, the limp-wristed, metrosexual, effete left-wing Obamaniacs won’t be able to take care of themselves. But the rural whites will. And we got the guns and the land and the skills.
18 Great White Observer: Why are the Democrats made up of the wealthiest and the poorest, the best and least educated, most and least intelligent? Read 1984, particularly Chapter 3 of the book within the book, “Ignorance is Strength”.
