November 14, 2010

How could Obama earn re-election?

My new VDARE.com column:  "How Obama Could Earn Re-Election"
In an alternative universe in which John McCain had had the guts to take Obama to the mat over Rev. Wright, the Arizonan likely would have made a pretty miserable President. Yet one constructive thing McCain would have been politically well-positioned to do—if he so chose—would have been to use his reputation for bloodthirstiness to instead declare victory in the expensive war in Afghanistan and bring the troops home.

In contrast, Obama, hamstrung by his lack of military credibility, is now hinting that he’ll keep troops in Afghanistan past his announced withdrawal date of 2011, all the way to 2014.

So in what field does Obama have the personal credibility to declare victory and bring the troops home?

Where does he possess the personal authority to end a wasteful war, thus simultaneously improving the economy and getting himself re-elected by reassuring white voters? 

To find out the answer, read the whole thing here.

101 comments:

Anonymous said...

Republicans in opposition are a looooooot different, man. Remember 1994?

Anonymous said...

Steve, Obama always, ALWAYS claimed Afghanistan was the "good war" and that, in fact, McCain was crazy for not invading Pakistan to boot! I don't know where you get this idea.

Jehu said...

Operation Wetback II, Obama says that the toleration of illegal immigration in the US by his predecessors such as the Bushes and Reagan has undermined respect for the rule of law and has set to people of the nation against one another. Afterwards he proceeds to eject or promote the self-deportation of over 10 million illegal immigrants and puts into place severe sanctions against anyone knowingly employing illegals. Overall unemployment in the US drops substantially, a macro version of what happened in the meat packing plants that you blogged about some time ago and Obama is reelected in a landslide. Would never happen, but it would work and is within his power to implement unilaterally...the Executive actually enforcing laws, who'd have thought it.

Captain Jack Aubrey said...

He doesn't, and by bowing to every dread sovereign who is not either white or Christian, and apologizing for America everywhere, he has hobbled his credibility as a patriotic American with any American who is paying attention.

John McCain had the credibility to end the wars. That would've been nice. He had the bloodthirstiness, perhaps, to deal with Islamic terrorism the rational way - by promising to bomb a Middle Eastern city or two in revenge for terrorist acts. That would've been awesome.

What he did not have, of course, was the political skills or popularity to force Congress to cut the deficit, and to act in economically rational ways. Further, he was adamantly open borders.

If McCain had won, the economy would still be in the doldrums, only the Republicans would've taken the blame, and the Democrats would've walked away from the 2010 elections with veto-proof majorities. In the best spirit of bipartisanship ("stupid AND evil"), McCain would've used those Democratic majorities to pass amnesty.

It's better that Obama won. Anyone who lived through 1994 (as I did) could've predicted (as I did) that Obama's far left philosophy would create a backlash in the midterms.

Sometimes it is better to lose.

Whiskey said...

Ending AA first, is impossible for a guy like Obama whose entire reason for being is to punish White guys for the sin of existing (and "racism"). So it will never happen.

And even if it did, ending AA would not end outsourcing. Jobs would still flow like water to India and China. Or be hit hard by a tidal wave of H1-Bs on the high end of the wage scale. And lots of illegals on the low end. The LAT reports that car wash guys who are illegal get paid 3.50 an hour instead of the State Min Wage of $8.

Illegals are not hired because of AA costs driving up wages of citizens. They are hired because they are CHEAPER. Same reason as H1-Bs and Outsourcing.

Whiskey said...

Let me add, Obama's demand to gin up more racial transfers of wealth, more Chicago hard-nose politics, more punishing of enemies, more La Raza pandering, more bad economic policy (primarily a weak dollar) guarantees the worst of all worlds:

Inflation in everyday necessities: food, energy/gas, clothing. Weak dollars equal poor purchasing power of inflated commodities.

"We are taking over" from Illegals now forming the majority in many school districts and proposals to let them vote and get special privileged treatment.

Someone will argue, deport all illegals, their kids, and grand-kids (citizens or not) and get: lower taxes, ObamaCare without rationing, no death panels, first class schools for Whites. Cheaper real estate without Mexican crime and poverty.

Why not? People are AFRAID. Of losing it all. So they'll sign up for even a course of being called "racist" as an alternative to being on the street. A real prospect with huge inflation in food, clothing, and energy while wages stagnate, illegals flood in, Whites are second class, and no prospect of economic growth, in wages and jobs.

Not even Obama's economic advisors expect much improvement in jobs or wages. While Fed's printing dollars equals a debased currency and hyper-inflation.

My guess, Mexico collapses, we get fifty million Mexicans fleeing into the US, Obama proposes to make them instant citizens and gets impeached and convicted. Because the stakes are too high.

Obama is playing like its Chicago and losers can go live in Evanston or something. Which stagflation, massive Mexican immigration, combined make impossible. Suddenly being thrust into Mexico (and on the street as a gringo) is a recipe for not just impeachment (which Clinton managed) but conviction. Obama raised the stakes too much. There is nowhere else to go but fight.

asdfadfadf said...

"That’s what has happened in the South, which has been the main locus of multiracial political competition. For example, in the South Carolina U.S. Senate race, Democratic candidate Alvin Greene, an unemployed black man who has been living with his father since being kicked out of the military, carried the black vote 80-9. But he lost because the white Republican incumbent Jim DeMint won the white vote 82-9."

Who were the 9% of whites who voted for Greene???? I'm surprised it was that high.

Anonymous said...

"Wait for the economy to improve (possible)."

You really think so? I mean, it may improve at some point between now and eternity, but first, wouldn't the debt situation have to be resolved in some more or less cataclysmic way? We haven't gone through that yet.

dfasdfasdf said...

Woo white women voters by going on Oprah and View a thousand times.

Anonymous said...

Canadian troops are now going to be kept past their end date. This is the fourth extension, due to American bullying.

OneSTDV said...

Obama's the greatest President ever.

Only a liberal, nurtured in foreign lands by an anti-whitey, lifelong grad student and in the Ivy League by anti-whitey, elite academics, could spur the waking giant of American conservatives.

eh said...

Perish the thought.

Anonymous said...

I like how Whiskey just says things to say it, Mexico will collapse and we'll get 50 million guys? Huh?


Here's my Whiskey-esque (meaning, wrong and based off a virgin's view of the other gender) guess for the 2012 election, we get into a war with China, but the tough warrior alpha white male the republicans choose wont be voted in vapid, black loving white women.

Anonymous said...

I really don't get the constant claim that obama has a "chilly personality." He seems warm and friendly enough to me - what do you want? He's President of the United States, not Snufalufagus. Personally, I think many Americans are ready for a President who is less warm and fuzzy and more of a technocrat, a la Mitch Daniels.

Anonymous said...

Who were the 9% of whites who voted for Greene????

Just as roughly 9% of whites have IQs at or above 120, so too do roughly 9% of whites have IQs at or below 80 [mean 100; standard deviation 15].

PS: The really scary thing is that 80% of blacks voted for that kook.

I think that even we folk in the HBD-o-sphere tend to misunderestimate just how much the "minorities" truly loath and despise us.

CJ said...

Yes, in theory Obama could do a "Nixon to China" move in several areas, but it is not going to happen. There is no interest there, not just on Obama's part but also as regards the rest of his administration and the incumbent Democrat office-holders. Not gonna happen, and in fact we may see them double down on leftist policy in some areas.

Tom Regan said...

Is that a pig? With wings?
You thought McCain was bad, wait for Romney or Palin.
Obama will have one appearance on Letterman, one on Oprah, smile a lot, get his media lapdogs to throw around the racist tag a bit, and hey presto, a second term.

jody said...

all that has to happen is that the republicans nominate sarah palin as their candidate for president for 2012. then obama would have a good chance of winning again. US national economy could be better in 2012, unemployment could be 8% instead of 14% or whatever the real rate is, and of course obama will easily, easily crush palin in every last debate. palin is about as qualified as obama to hold the office of president- that is to say, not qualified at all. and obama is smarter. palin is definitely the least intelligent person likely to get the republican nomination in 2012. she's just plain not smart enough to be president.

not a good combination for running against all the intelligent, media savvy, slick and polished democrat lawyers who will be backing barack obama. these guys viciously attack the smarter, more experienced and well organized republicans. what will they do to palin? it will be a total destruction.

by far the single most important thing for republicans is to jettison sarah palin. she's no different at all than britney spears, some random backwoods person who none of us had EVER heard of until, by total random chance and through absolutely no accomplishment or talent of her own, she was deliberately put into the national spotlight. and now we can't get rid of her, and she sticks around.

at the national level, palin is as much long term trouble for the republicans as michael steele. you don't want her speaking for your group. you don't want her to have the microphone. once she opens her mouth and is free to start leading the party and making up her own ideas and policies, it will be a fiasco.

Luke Lea said...

Other Obama-goes-to-China options that would improve American employment prospects:

a. Immigration moratorium.

b. Tariffs on East Asian imports

c. End corporate income tax.

anony-mouse said...

Instead of being thought of as dirty animals pigs could earn our respect and admiration...

... by flying.


So why don't they?

Chicago said...

He can get re-elected by the tried and true method of staging an incident similar to the Gulf of Tonkin. He can then bluster and posture his way up the poll ratings. At present the Afghan fiasco is wearing thin and people are wondering what the point of it all might be at this point. Blowing up sub-poverty natives in their own country is looking less and less heroic these days. A new, fresh threat has to come along at the right time to scare the ever fearful American public. I'll be waiting to see how cynical the manipulation will get.

Mel Torme said...

Steve, that was one of the best articles I've read from you. The history that you describe is very interesting, and I'm not sure I ever thought of things like this.

Now, that being said, you wrote the book on Obama, right? Yes, I see your 3rd-from-last line, but I think you could explain better than anyone why this guy would never do that.

Obama is much different from Bill Clinton. Clinton favored poontang over politics (the POP strategery). Really, if he could get more (everything, but especially one thing) doing a 180 from the left-wing beliefs and supporting welfare reform, he would. It worked out very well for everyone, as you may have written about before.

Obama is not this way. He really wants to "fundamentally transform the country", which really means "accelerate the transformation from freedom to socialism that has been going on for some 80 years, to the endpoint". He wants to see this endpoint. He has already been affirmative-actioned up to as high a position as an American can get. He would not care about the extra 4 years for the money and to keep the $200 million/day travel benefits and the fading glory (of visiting a 3rd-world shithole and having people revere him). I think the man wants to see the transition to communism happen soon, so he can be known to be the one that brought it.

If America has woken up enough by 2012, and this man has no chance for re-election, you will hear from him and his wife that America is just not educated enough to accept him.

Anyway, I agree some Republican should bring this up. I also agree it would help the economy, but we'd need a whole lot more large changes than this to help American small business. Otherwise, we are going down for the count.

Anonymous said...

Obama is not this way. He really wants to "fundamentally transform the country", which really means "accelerate the transformation from freedom to socialism that has been going on for some 80 years

Obama is not and has never been a socialist. He is a race man. That's it. That's all he is.

That's why he is quite happy to flush away this generation's easiest opportunity to bring Wall Street under control. Instead of really regulating Wall Street, he writes a bill which lets Wall Street go on with business as usual BUT WITH ONE CAVEAT: more Affirmative Action.

Same thing with health care: The majority of the public is clamoring for the government to bring the insurance and drug companies under control. A significant plurality wants the government to eliminate the insurance companies altogether and replace them with government-run healthcare. What does Obama do? He meets privately with them and agrees to leave the situation as before, except now citizens are legally required to sign up with the rapacious private insurers. ONE CAVEAT: he writes more Affirmative Action into the health care bill.

David said...

>Who were the 9% of whites who voted for Greene???? I'm surprised it was that high.<

White women with black baby daddies?

David said...

It's not about Obama.

Obama - any president - is merely a figurehead, not a "decider" (laughable Bush). But particularly Mr. Teleprompter, the ultimate empty suit.

It's the powers behind the scenes that determines what "The President" does. And they don't want an end to racial quotas, or to mass illegal immigration. Their puppet will not rebel against his masters.

David said...

>Remember 1994?<

Yeah, a phony revolution. Just a way to get back into power. What large reforms were implemented by the Contract with America? Whom do we sue for breach of contract?

All politicians are swine.

Dan Kurt said...

re:'Who were the 9% of whites who voted for Greene???? I'm surprised it was that high." asdfadfadf

Ever hear of YELLOW DOG DEMOCRATS? That is the group of whites who supported him.

Dan Kurt

Anonymous said...

Steve, you've got a better chance at an affair with Michelle than getting Obama to adopt Jared Taylor's policy proposal.

slyboots said...

I don't really see that he could earn it, but he will *get* it if the Republicans nominate Sarah Palin.

eh said...

PS: The really scary thing is that 80% of blacks voted for that kook.

I don't find it "scary" -- more like totally predictable. No question Obama collared the 'stick it to Whitey' vote. And people who don't think that motivated a lot of Blacks are just kidding themselves.

Anyway, regardless of the exact number, it's gotta be higher than that -- the percentage of blacks who voted (and among Blacks, who else matters?) and voted for Obama has got to be higher than that.

Fully 96 percent of black voters supported Obama and constituted 13 percent of the electorate, a 2-percentage-point rise in their national turnout.

Not sure how this really breaks out, but it would be a little surprising if Obama's candidacy boosted black turnout by only about 19% (2/11); I would've expected more than that.

Dan Kurt said...

Will white America wake up?

Little cracks that I see suggest to me a sea change is coming. Anecdote follows.

A friend about my age is in his second marriage. He raised a family with his first wife. After the divorce he and his new wife moved to the town where I live. They had a son who is now a Senior in High School and is contemplating college. Both parents have Doctorates the son is brilliant and has done all the right things with the parent's help ( something bright whites in second marriages often tend to do with offspring).

Last week after a trip to Stanford with the son the father told my wife, an Ivy League Ph.D., that BECAUSE his son was WHITE his chance of being accepted to Stanford was 7%. He was told that if the boy had been a female, a black, an Hispanic or other SPECIAL minority the chance would have soared to over 90%. Only had his race been North Asian would the chance be lower than 7%.

This friend of ours has never been politically active to my knowledge. He and his current wife have played by the rules. He is a scientist whose hobby is long distance Astronomy meaning he has an observatory that is over a thousand miles from his home that he uses by telemetry. He pays a company to maintain his equipment at the site where his and other like minded amateurs have their telescopes. If my wife has an accurate take on this man's new attitude, he will become politically active in the future.

Similar events are happening all over this country to the white majority.

Dan Kurt

Anonymous said...

I also thought that McCain, for similar reasons, would have been able to push for more effective financial reform.

Anonymous said...

Barry has been diagnosed an an affirmative incompetent with a good dose of narcissism. He's done.

Anonymous said...

Steve, I have had similar thoughts to this post. Obama would become a true hero if he did what you wrote about. He would remembered for this amazing move, which would help blacks as much as it would help asians, whites, etc. It would me a moment of truth and justice for the world to remember. I know I sound hyperbolic, but, I so wish he would do this, because he is the only one who can.

RKU said...

Ha, ha! And as a bonus, Obama would surely then get assassinated by some "disgruntled former supporter," allowing him to go down in the history books as one of America's "martyr-presidents"...

Captain Jack Aubrey said...

Other Obama-goes-to-China options that would improve American employment prospects: ... c. End corporate income tax.

That might be an Obama goes to China momemt (though what it really might emphasize is the truth that Democrats are more corporatist than they ever admit). But it's not exactly a populist bandwagon to jump on.

Quite simply, the public doesn't give a shit about cutting corporate income taxes. And it wouldn't make sense, either. No corporate income tax, and wealthy stockholders could abscond to Bermuda and pay no personal income tax and no txes through the corporations. A corporate income tax captures some of the income such people earn from the American market, no matter where they live.

Is that you, Steve Forbes?

Anonymous said...

Christopher Caldwell takes on a lot of Steve's themes:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ae7f2146-ee90-11df-9db0-00144feab49a.html#axzz15NFneARH

adfasdfasdfaf said...

2008.

McCain was a weak candidate. GOP label was in the pits. Bush fatigue. Economic meltdown. Obama's fund double that of McCains. Palin disliked by independents. Obama hype and hysteria.

Yet, Obama won only 52% to 53% of the vote in the worst possible yr for GOP.

2012 race is for the GOP to lose.
If they come up with a confident, articulate, smart, and charismatic candidate, it will win.
Palin aint it. Too ignorant and dumb.
Romney aint it. Too stiff, boring, and opportunistic.
Giuliani coulda been it, but too much of twofaced snake.
Ron Paul. Too 'radical' for independents. Neocons will attack him full force. Too old.
Rand Paul. Bad hair day dude.
The Southern preacher guy. Articulate but bad political baggage and too liberal on some issues, too religious on some others.

GOP needs to think in terms of central casting. Someone who has aura and who can act!! Like Reagan. Liberals groomed Obama for a long time. He didn't so much have a political career as an acting career. HE was told by his handlers not to get too political; he was told to remain aloof lest he get his hands too dirty.

GOP shouldn't look for candidates among politicians necessarily. How about hold an audition?

John said...

Obama is not this way. He really wants to "fundamentally transform the country", which really means "accelerate the transformation from freedom to socialism that has been going on for some 80 years

Obama is not and has never been a socialist. He is a race man. That's it. That's all he is.


Exactly. Obama's greatest goal is to break the white demographic power structure as soon as possible (even if it's ultimately bad for blacks, as in allowing in hordes of Mexicans).

It's an obsession of his (and of nearly all blacks). They are convinced that they would thrive once out from under the boot of "oppressive" whitey, despite evidence of failure in every NAM run society. Doesn't matter to them if everybody's life is in the shitter, and their's even worse than before... as long as whitey's no longer in charge.

Their notions are little different than South African blacks in this respect.

Truth said...

"How could Obama earn re-election?"

Easy, run agains Sarah Palin.

"He had the bloodthirstiness, perhaps, to deal with Islamic terrorism the rational way - by promising to bomb a Middle Eastern city or two in revenge for terrorist acts. That would've been awesome."

Yeah, mass homicide seems to be considered an "awesome" thing here. Unless it's a couple of black guys doing it, then as Borat says; "naut so mauch!"

"He seems warm and friendly enough to me - what do you want? He's President of the United States, not Snufalufagus."

LMAO, Now that was worth the price of admission.

Truth said...

"Only had his race been North Asian would the chance be lower than 7%."

For some strange reason, Dan, you don't seem similarly outraged by this young man's white skin giving him an advantage, why?

Anonymous said...

Is it possible to have a probability of less than zero? Because that is never ever going to happen. The difference between Obama and Nixon is that Nixon never really agreed in principle with a hard line against China, but went along with it because domestic politics at the time left no other option. Nixon felt that giving the Soviets an enemy to account for in the East would be a boon to NATO and he was right, The Soviets needed at least 500,000 troops on the Sino-Soviet border which then couldn't be pointed at Western Europe. Obama has drunk so deeply from the Affirmative Action Kool-Aid that it would never even dawn on him to question it's assumptions much less the damage it does to the economy.

Anonymous said...

How much smarter or more qualified is Sarah Palin than Alvin Greene? And a lot of whites support her for PRESIDENT, not merely Congress.

Steve, following your advice would be political suicide for Obama. He would lose support of the black community--which is the support that matters to his legacy (among whites) most--and SWPL whites don't like to support an uncle tom.

Vilko said...

« People are AFRAID. Of losing it all. So they'll sign up for even a course of being called "racist" as an alternative to being on the street. A real prospect with huge inflation in food, clothing, and energy while wages stagnate, illegals flood in, Whites are second class, and no prospect of economic growth, in wages and jobs. »
Whiskey, I think you're right on this. But is there a real alternative to "huge inflation in food, clothing, and energy while wages stagnate" ? IMHO there's none. Basically the USA produces dollars nowadays, and the more dollars it produces the poorer it will be in the future.
Nevertheless, it will escape the worst because it still has large energetic, mineral and agricultural resources.

Harry Baldwin said...

Remember this from the 2008 campaign?

Obama said that his two daughters should not be given preferential treatment, owing to their relatively privileged upbringing, and has called for government to “craft” a policy “in such a way where some of our children who are advantaged aren't getting more favorable treatment than a poor white kid who has struggled more.”

What a joke. Obama had not the slightest intention of taking away any possible advantage that his daughters might enjoy, but he is clever enough to know that making it sound like he's considering the possibility would earn him some points with whites. Presumably, those whites who were fooled have figured this out by now.

Chief Seattle said...

It's a good thing that Obama's handlers own the opposing team as well. That way Obama can continue unlimited immigration and ever-rising AA benefits. And then when he loses in 2012 his opponent can do the same.

Only way out of this is systemic collapse, or finding a real competitor on the world stage. If China actually becomes powerful (questionable how much is Japan-style hype at this point) then TPTB might decide that their future is aligned with middle-class whitey. Until then, they'll continue to rape and pillage the country.

Anonymous said...

9 percent = Time Wise Democrats.

The Yellow dogs are pretty much all dead. Aren't they?

You know, it's also surprised me that despite blacks and whites voting so differently in the South (the same is true for Mexicans and whites in Texas), they seem to get along okay and racial flareups don't seem to happen down there much. On the other hand, in the northeast, despite whites and blacks/Latinos voting the same way, there is more than a little tension between white ethnics (Irish, Polish, Jewish, especially Italian) and NAMs. Can somebody explain this to me?

Obama could cut immigration, secure our border, balance the budget, put up some more trade barriers, or cut taxes/regulations on domestic corporations. He could do a lot of things.

McCain would've taken us to war in Iran and given us an amnesty. So I'm not sure if it's such a bad thing he lost, though I did vote for him....

I wish JD Hayworth was the Senator from Arizona.

none of the above said...

Anonymous:

That's what racial identity politics looks like. You vote with your ethnic group, regardless of qualities or qualifications. "He may be a crook, but by God, he's *our* crook."

Anonymous said...

Steve - wonderful essay but since when does McCain have a reputation for ruthlessness? As regards to Afghanistan I never heard anyone from any major party exhibit appropriate ruthlessness.

We spent a lot of time and treasure trying to build a liberal democratic civilization in Iraq. After all we had been successful in Germany and Japan. Iraq may very well revert to a brutal dictatorship but it was - in my judgement - worth a try.

But no one, anywhere ever thought that Afghanistan was a candidate for "nation building". Afghanistan offended us and should have been punished. This should have been a simple punitive war. From twenty thousand feet we should have dropped nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. We should have killed a lot of people - period.

Other nations would have hesitated to harbor the Taliban or Al Qaeda bases thereafter. Isn't that all we wanted?

We could have called it "Operation Righteous Wrath". Bush might have been more unpopular or maybe he might have been more popular. An appropriately ruthless head of state wouldn't care.

America is still vulnerable and it still has loads of CBN weapons. The Obama administration wants protect us by looking under our cloths at airports. Another provocation like 9/11 and we may very well see real punitive - ruthless - reaction.

I just was reading about the naval arms race after the First World War. We were signatories to the London Agreement that limited cruisers to 10,000 tons displacement. The Japanese cheated. Their treaty cruisers averaged 11,000 tons. We in an abundance of caution built cruisers that averaged about 9,000 tons. When these ships met head to head at Guadalcanal, the Japanese had quite an advantage.

The Roosevelt administration apparently didn't want to be criticized. Hundreds of American sailors paid the price. Political correctness has been around for a while. America has a long way to go before it is in any way ruthless.

Albertosaurus

Sylvia said...

It strikes me that Steve desperately wants to see Obama re-elected, having invested so much in the man.

And all that focusing on the prez since all the way back in 2007 must have brought him closer to the guy.

Sigh.

rob said...

Why would Obama want to end AA? What's the point of being president if you can't do the shit you want to do?

Svigor said...

I don't know if anyone's even made the comment on this thread, but I've seen it a lot here and elsewhere lately and it's time to clear something up.

No, losing majority status is not the end for white America. It's the beginning. I know doom and gloom sells tickets for some people, and satisfies a psychic need for others. But I think it's a mistake. Doom and gloom of that kind gives people an excuse to give up.

And it's based on an error. The majority does not make decisions in this country. Elected reps do. And that's precisely how we got into this mess; elected reps selling out. Well, that tells me they're for sale. And while white America may lose their majority soon, they're not going to lose their cash advantage any time soon. Quite the opposite, our enemies will find their sources of cash drying up. Let's see how much cash they can squeeze out of NAMs for elections and bribes, lol.

Voter demographics won't mean quite as much when white Americans start thinking and acting like a minority; NAM politicians are even more venal than our own.

Svigor said...

Let Wise put that in his pipe and smoke it; his delusions of America's future won't survive white tax revolt, widespread white activism and radicalization, divestment, lawfare, jury nullification, etc.

corvinus said...

Just as roughly 9% of whites have IQs at or above 120, so too do roughly 9% of whites have IQs at or below 80 [mean 100; standard deviation 15].

PS: The really scary thing is that 80% of blacks voted for that kook.


Blacks would vote 80%+ for Satan himself if he ran as a black Democrat.

AOL said...

OT:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/blogs/live-feed/sarah-palins-alaska-breaks-tlc-45421

From Grizzly Adams to Grizzly Madams.

Mel Torme said...

"A corporate income tax captures some of the income such people earn from the American market, no matter where they live."

Bullcrap, Captain (I usually agree with your posts, BTW): Corporate income tax is paid by the customers. It's that simple. Or, it's not paid by the customers, because that company has been put out of business by foreign competition from countries in which business is not regulated and taxed as much as it is here (maybe ~ 175 countries, including CHINA).

No, I am not Steve Forbes, either, although I get him to wash my car sometimes. I showed him what you wrote, and he was pretty amused.

Dutch Boy said...

It was a tongue-in-cheek column, folks! Even the Republicans won't end AA, much less Mr. Soetero.

Mel Torme said...

"Ha, ha! And as a bonus, Obama would surely then get assassinated by some "disgruntled former supporter," allowing him to go down in the history books as one of America's "martyr-presidents"..."

No, you have to have been elected in a year that ends with a zero - check it out (this also includes being shot but surviving - i.e. Ronald Reagan (elected 1980)). You don't necessarily get shot (or die naturally), in that year. That's just the way it works; I don't make the rules. It's just wishful thinking, otherwise.

Truth said...

BTW:

For all of you world-renowned geniuses talking about Greene, 1/5 black votes going to a Republican candidate is relatively speaking, an EXTREMELY high percentage. Higher than any Republican candidate for president (running against a white or black man) has received in my lifetime.

Anonymous said...

"Exactly. Obama's greatest goal is to break the white demographic power structure as soon as possible (even if it's ultimately bad for blacks, as in allowing in hordes of Mexicans)."


Oh yeah.

Obama hates whites more than he loves blacks.

asdfadsfasf said...

I still say get rid of GOP, let's all join the Democrat. Then, within the one party system, we can forge an alliance with white moderates. As long as the GOP exists, it will split the white vote. If GOP goes, white conservaties within Democratic Party can forge alliances with white moderates.

B Lode said...

It was a tongue-in-cheek column, folks! - Dutch Boy

Well, not technically. It describes a possibility; it's not a prediction. There's nothing wrong with pointing out the difference between Lack of Ability and Lack of Political Will. Obama's lack of fortitude, courage, clear-thinking, and ethics excuses him from nothing. He has the chance to make a decent statesman of himself - that is why he will deserve our contempt.

Tom in VA said...

Since you live in California, Steve, I'll assume you have a prescription for whatever you've been smoking. Must be good stuff.

Mr. Anon said...

"Truth said...

For all of you world-renowned geniuses talking about Greene, 1/5 black votes going to a Republican candidate is relatively speaking, an EXTREMELY high percentage. Higher than any Republican candidate for president (running against a white or black man) has received in my lifetime."

For your benefit, genius:

4/5 >> 1/5

4 out of 5 black voters in SC cast thier ballot for a black Chris Peterson - and one who doesn't even have a paper route) - apparently because he shares his name with a famous soul singer.

Hey, "Truth", maybe you could run for high office - just change your name to Wilson Pickett.

Mr. Anon said...

My favorite "Obama Goes To China" scenario?

Obama defects to China,.....and doesn't come back.

Mr. Anon said...

"David said...

>Remember 1994?<

Yeah, a phony revolution. Just a way to get back into power. What large reforms were implemented by the Contract with America? Whom do we sue for breach of contract?

All politicians are swine."

You said it. And none more so than that unctuous, porcine little creep, Newt Gingrich.

The republican ascendency in 1994 was good for the financial and telecommunications business. It wasn't so good for american industry or the american worker.

RKU said...

Who were the 9% of whites who voted for Greene????

Just as roughly 9% of whites have IQs at or above 120, so too do roughly 9% of whites have IQs at or below 80 [mean 100; standard deviation 15].


That's an excellent point! Now I don't doubt that most of the white retards in South Carolina have negative feelings toward blacks in general, but the opportunity to support a fellow retard for the U.S. Senate was just too great an opportunity to let slip by. So in this particular case, their retard-loyalty overcame their white-loyalty.

All of us should recognize that human feelings comprise a huge mass of conflicting and overlapping loyalties---ideology, religion, race, gender, geography, employment, education, ethnicity, and certainly retardness as well. And depending upon the circumstances, any one of these may dominate in a given situation.

Tom V said...

Truth:

For some strange reason, Dan, you don't seem similarly outraged by this young man's white skin giving him an advantage

Sure, there's an element of "who? whom?" here. It's hard to be outraged when it's your side that's getting an unfair advantage.

That's not the whole story, though. Degrees matter. Objectively speaking, the Asian percentage would have to be 0.5% to be as outrageous versus 7% as 7% is versus 90%. Highly doubtful.

The Asian percentage would make the AA one look even more outrageous, however.

Kylie said...

You mean being the smartest person in whatever room he's in might not do it the second time around?


Good luck convincing him of that.

Captain Jack Aubrey said...

Yeah, mass homicide seems to be considered an "awesome" thing here. Unless it's a couple of black guys doing it, then as Borat says; "naut so mauch!" - Truth

Well the question of how we adequately respond to Islamic terrorism has yet to be satisfactorily answered by anyone in position of leadership.

How do we respond to another 9/11 style terrorist act? With another $400 billion nation building exercise? Screw that.

AngryWhiteMan said...

As a White-American man, my position is non-negotiable. I demand that Barack Hussein Obama sign executive orders banning affirmative action and hate-crimes laws, and that he become a daytime TV talk-show host in the same time slot as Oprah.

Jack said...

"For some strange reason, Dan, you don't seem similarly outraged by this young man's white skin giving him an advantage

Sure, there's an element of "who? whom?" here. It's hard to be outraged when it's your side that's getting an unfair advantage."

It's hard to be outraged when your chance is already so low that making it lower does little difference. Also, he did not say it was fair that Chong the math whiz has a lower chance. And finally, this is HIS country. There are many universities in Asia.

Anonymous said...

The needless spat between the Pelosi-Hoyer leadership and the black caucus (http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/16/democrats.black.caucus/) is certainly illustrative of problems you mention facing the democrats.

lesley said...

"It's not about Obama.

Obama - any president - is merely a figurehead, not a "decider" (laughable Bush). But particularly Mr. Teleprompter, the ultimate empty suit.

It's the powers behind the scenes that determines what "The President" does. And they don't want an end to racial quotas, or to mass illegal immigration. Their puppet will not rebel against his masters."


Absolutely. Sometimes I am surprised at how much even thinking people think politicians' parties matter, or even the pols themselves. They matter little, and the higher you go, the less they matter. Local politicians can actually affect change in a personal way--you can influence on that level; but at the presidential level, it's entirely controlled from behind the scenes. I don't know how long this has been true--probably most of our history, but Woodrow Wilson whispered that to a confidant in 1919 or so.
It's almost never that I would use the arrogant, extreme accusation, "you don't know what you're talking about," but you REALLY don't know what you're talking about if you believe Pearl Harbor had anything to do with "political correctness" way back then. Roosevelt knew it was coming and he did nothing. This was admitted in mainstream news a few years ago, as was another appallingly callous almost-did-it plan hatched by generals about 1961, called Northwoods. It's one of those things that is just too hard to believe, like that your parents abuse you and want to kill you. Fortunately the President vetoed it so we shall never know whether it would have worked out they way they wanted.
In the words of General Smedley Butler, "War is a racket." He admitted he'd been a gangster for corporate interests, whose crumbs we the people also eat.
America needs no lessons in ruthlessness. Or whoever the hell is running this country needs no such lessons.

Truth said...

"Objectively speaking, the Asian percentage would have to be 0.5% to be as outrageous versus 7% as 7% is versus 90%. Highly doubtful."

You miss the basic point; there are, what, 20,000 slots for incoming freshman at "elite" universities in America each year? If admissions were totally colorblind, the black percentage would go from 6% to 1% and the white (meaning WASP) percentage from 30% to 10%. Steve-O told me in an email onece that recent IQ tests have the median IQ amongst Hong Kong teens at up to ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY TWO(!?!?!?!)

I know, I know; "But a guy who looked like me laid bricks on the damn school 300 years ago, I DESERVE admission!"

"How do we respond to another 9/11 style terrorist act? With another $400 billion nation building exercise? Screw that."

Well, the Air Force not adhering to a stand down order from a guy on a walkie-talkie from in a cave in Afghanistan* would be a good first step.




*Sarcasm, Bruh.

David said...

>Let Wise put that in his pipe and smoke it<

Wait until our governments go broke and there is much less money for "entitlement" programs (and foreign adventures). The only thing propping up Timothy's would-be barbarians is government cheese, in the form not only of transfer payments in their many kinds but also of government jobs, "affirmative action," set-asides, "integration," etc. Shrink the government to year-1910-size -- or even to year-1950-size -- and all the steam will be out of the multicult.

As old Alyssa Rosenbaum ("Ayn Rand") accurately observed, it's the productive, smart Atlases who are bearing aloft the parasites' universe. That insupportable world is coming down soon, whether or not we like it, and whether or not Timothy knows it (I believe he does).

We should lend it a hand, though - by doing the following things (at minimum).

1. Politically, support the most libertarian candidates and causes you can find (if kooks make you nervous, just remember the kookier the better in this context).

2. Personally, spend no discretionary income on other than gold, guns, and ammo. Also make some (more) like-minded buddies.

We have reached such a terrible pass that Government has been transformed from the very foundation of Civilization to its engine of destruction.

Therefore, for Civilization to survive, Government must be undone.

jody said...

LOL @ california.

in-state tuition for illegal aliens.

the US is so fucked.

Ray Sawhill said...

Genius analysis, Steve.

Al Green & the Creations said...

Truth said...

talking about Greene, 1/5 black votes going to a Republican candidate is relatively speaking, an EXTREMELY high percentage. Higher than any... in my lifetime.


By claiming 80% of blacks voting for Alvin Greene (lambasted even by the very liberal Young Turks) is a historical low, you only highlight how extreme the prejudice and/or blind loyalty of the black electorate typically is.

Two thoughts:

1. How did Greene beat the machine candidate (black lawyer, SC state senator and judge Vic Rawl) in the Democratic primary with virtually no money, endorsements or campaigning?

The only explaination I've heard is that his name sounds almost identical to popular soul singer "Al Green" while his opponent's name only distantly approaches the name of "Lou Rawls" who appeals to whites far more than blacks.

Is this a new GOP Sailer strategy, plan B? Could Obama's aloof WASPy shick visually compete with a bedazzling white-gloved GOP Marky Jackson moonwalking in his TV spots. Could Obama's stiff teleprompter oratory prevail in a League of Women Voters debate over a smokey-voiced GOP Bernie White backed by a throbbing bassline?

Svigor said...

For all of you world-renowned geniuses talking about Greene, 1/5 black votes going to a Republican candidate is relatively speaking, an EXTREMELY high percentage. Higher than any Republican candidate for president (running against a white or black man) has received in my lifetime.

So Satan in blackface (D) would only get 70% or so?

Svigor said...

Their notions are little different than South African blacks in this respect.

There's an interesting book review by Jared Taylor of a SA race-realist author you might want to read. His take is that blacks don't really believe this stuff, they just take their liberal marching orders and milk them for what they can. It's not like they're lying, really, just saying what's expected of them.

Sorry, no link. Someone posted it in the comments here in the last week or two.

I think blacks know whites are the gravy train, in an inchoate/self-deceptive sort of way; why expect them to have razor-sharp political beliefs, or altruistic honesty, on this one issue?

Svigor said...

How much smarter or more qualified is Sarah Palin than Alvin Greene?

Palin is as much more qualified than Greene as Obama is.

As for smart, who knows for sure? 'Bammy keeps them grades and test scores under lock and key last I heard.

Svigor said...

Can somebody explain this to me?

I'd start with "population density."

Then I'd throw in red state law and order mentality.

Then cultural differences. It's just a different culture down here. Blacks here aren't big on perpetual grievance, and whites wouldn't be amenable if they were.

Maybe someone else can make up the difference?

Svigor said...

Plus there isn't as much in the way of big government to loot in the first place. Or money, for that matter.

none of the above said...

The whole point of terrorism is that the attacks don't come with a return address we can easily reach. Think about 9/11--the attackers were mostly Saudi, the planners were Egyptian and Pakistani, some of the organization apparently behind the attack was hiding in Afghanistan. Where do we bomb to retaliate?

Our answer was Afghanistan (which kind-of made sense) and Iraq (which didn't). In some sense, invading Iraq watered down our deterrent, sending the message that if we're p-ssed off at you, we'll invade you even if you have nothing to do with any terrorist attack on us. (I'm very sure the leadership of Iran noticed this, as well as the fact that we haven't invaded the country with both a large AQ presence and nuclear weapons.)

There's a weird irony to seeing someone like Albertosaurus talking about our unwillingness to be brutal enough. See, if we'd just flattened Kabul in vengance, said "let this be a lesson to you," and left, the number of dead Afghans would be far *lower* than it is now. (Afghans, expecting this rational response, were bugging out of Kabul very soon after the attack.) We are fine with brutal. But we have to find a way to tell a compassionate story with it--to explain as we're flattening a country, blowing up weddings and houses full of kids, or wringing answers from prisoners in torture chambers, that we're really only doing this for their own good. And so, we have stayed there nearly a decade now, pretending we're going to remake Afghan society into something other than the godawful thing it is. We won't, and (just as with the performance gap in school), cynical, worldly, reasonably smart people like Bush, Obama, Hillary, Gates, McChrystal, and the rest almost certainly understand that. But they can't *say* it or act like they know it.

We're so compassionate, we have killed something like a million people between Afghanistan and Iraq (and Pakistan and Somalia and Yemen and God knows where else), of whom probably less than a thousand had any connection to AQ, and perhaps a couple dozen had anything remotely to do with the 9/11 attack.

none of the above said...

I can imagine Obama doing something like this (he's ideally placed), but I don't expect it. He has so far shown no courage whatsoever on controversial issues where he'd previously held some kind of position. Look at his rhetoric on the war on terror vs. his practice, which has been all but indistinguishable from that of Bush. (Both Democrats and Republicans play up the differences, but they're tiny. Bush had ended the torture program and committed to the withdrawal from Iraq before Obama took office, even though Obama takes credit for these as achievements, for example.)

His example will still be useful ending AA. How is anyone going to propose that the Obama kids, with two Harvard law school grads as parents, having grown up in the white house, need easier admissions standards than the kids of white factory workers and coal miners?

Anonymous said...

OT

Interesting glimpse into neocon mind.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SX23LeLB8SM&feature=related

Anonymous said...

How much smarter or more qualified is Sarah Palin than Alvin Greene?

I don't get this "Sarah Palin is dumb" thing. She's clearly not cultured, and not a genius, but smarter than the average politician, and charismatic. I don't think Obama is dumb either, his problem is something else. Alvin Green has clearly mental problems or an IQ even lower than the average blacks and shouldn't run for janitor.

You don't need to be very smart to be a politician, basically you need the same skills of a good actor.

That does not mean that Palin's a good candidate for the presidency, she's not. Republicans need to come out with a charismatic white male to win.

Anonymous said...

OT:

Indians see through Obama's neocon policy BS. Lmao.

http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2010/nov/16/new-cold-war-asia/

Vilko said...

« His example will still be useful ending AA. How is anyone going to propose that the Obama kids, with two Harvard law school grads as parents, having grown up in the white house, need easier admissions standards than the kids of white factory workers and coal miners? »

The new majority will say: Whites have ruled this country for centuries, now it's our turn. End of the discussion.

jody said...

and LOL @ the idea that the US is "restrained" in iraq and afghanistan and not "going all out" and having too many "rules of engagement".

how restrained are russian military operations in general? think they held back in afghanistan?

not only did the russians pretty much kill anybody and everybody in afghanistan in pursuit of their objectives, they actually developed new weapons, thermobaric bombs, so they could kill people hiding in caves.

all the gung-ho american keyboard warriors suggest "taking the gloves off" is the way for the US to achieve it's goals in afghanistan. wrong. the US could not be half as ruthless as the russians even if they tried, and it would not matter anyway. removing all rules of engagement isn't what prevents the US from achieving it's objectives in afghanistan. afghanistan is what prevents the US from achieving it's objectives in afghanistan.

ben tillman said...

Alvin Green has clearly mental problems or an IQ even lower than the average blacks and shouldn't run for janitor.

Greene has a political science degree from the University of South Carolina.

David said...

Short David:

Government feeds the multicult but is going broke. Let's help it shrink.

Svigor said...

The new majority will say: Whites have ruled this country for centuries, now it's our turn. End of the discussion.

The new majority won't run things any more than the old majority did, which is why we're getting a new majority in the first place.

The money will continue to call the shots. What might change is whites' willingness to buy politicians.

Mr. Anon said...

@ jody

Well said.

Truth said...

"So Satan in blackface (D) would only get 70% or so?"

If Satan in blackface ran for senate, I would literally and honestly estimate that he'd get 60% of the vote. Satan in whiteface would get about 50%, in both instances in a very low turnout.

John Bomb Bomb Bomb McCain said...

How Obama could earn re-election?

The Neocons and MSM rig the GOP primaries again resulting in another neocon shill as the RINO presidential candidate in 2012.

David said...

The annual economic cost of "Affirmative Action" is $1.1 trillion.

Source (pdf): "Cost of Diversity: The Economic Costs of Racial and Cultural Diversity" by Edwin S. Rubenstein, National Policy Institute, Oct. 2008

He makes a good case.

So, assuming the end of AA came in, say, 2012, at Obama's order, then he would be responsible for $4.4 trillion in savings by the end of his second term.

Anonymous said...

How about Obama telling Blacks to stop all Black-on-White crime ? How about he and Michelle traveling to every major city with a Black/White population and telling his people to stop all crime. Or at least drop it down to the same per capita level as Whites. He could make it happen if he wanted to. Dropping the crime level way down would go a long way towards healing the racial divide in this country.
I don't think he'll do it. I don't think he's man enough.

Truth said...

"How about Obama telling Blacks to stop all Black-on-White crime ?"

So you don't want him to address white-on-white crime?

none of the above said...

Anonymous:

I don't see how that could possibly work. I mean, sure, Obama should tell young blacks to stop committing crimes, stop having kids they can't take care of, stay in school, do their homework, etc. But there are lots of people telling them those things, yet the problems persist. It's not like anyone is holding up liquor stores or killing rival gang members in drive-bys because nobody has ever told them it's wrong.