Marxism, Groucho-style

He once said, I believe, that he would never want to join any club that would have him as a member.
Contemporary Liberals/Victims take the opposite attitude: they are most drawn to places that don't want them...and that they often proclaim, under other circumstance, not to want themselves. Picky.

An old friend of mine, a wonderful man, but, alas, an EastCoast Liberal, responded to a FB post of mine by saying that "White" was a difficult idea to clarify. Nope, sorry, dude. Not hard at all. It may be a little fuzzy at the edges here and there, but what human thing isn't? (I include Georgians and Armenians as extensions of EuroChristendom in Asia and I exclude, obviously, Gypsies and, less obviously, Balkan Muslims as extensions of AsianIslam). That does not make it unclear, just not inhumanly absolute. Which is the standard Liberals love to invoke when their pets or pet causes are involved. As in, "Well, not all Muslims are terrorists." Zzzzzzz. True. And insignificant.

Whites are the descendants of the Caucasian native peoples of European Christendom: Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant. Not North Africans, not West Asians or IndoAryans.

I notice that White/Liberals who find the concept of "White" complex and problematic never seem to raise it about the other races: Is "Black" difficult? Or "Asian" or "Latino?" Nope. How many Liberals would dare challenge Barack Hussein's self-definition as Black, even though he is genetically half-White?

My own therapeutic suspicion is that they react this way because the prohibition against White self-identity is so profound and too many of them buy the narrative of our unique moral depravity, aka, our unparalleled success. CrimeThink.

But I notice a funny after-effect, too. Some of them are like the gay men I know who are grandly dismissive of the merely social construction of some vague oppressive notion like "masculinity." Yet, if you tell them that they are not real men, well, that's another story. Boom! How dare you exclude me from a group I hate and which I think does not exist?!

My friend reacted very definitely to my defining Ashkenazim out of the "White" category. The Jewish homeland is, by ancient and universal self- definition, Israel, not Europe. Caucasian, yes, like Arabs and Turks.  Hence...outside my definition. White-ish, but not truly White. Real Whites are Gentiles.

His wife's family is partly Jewish --as is mine--and he found the notion that her "profoundly European" grandfather was not White "laughable." Apparently then, "White" is suddenly not so difficult to understand after all. And how dare I exclude his child's bloodline.

Our people are very confused.

----

To be fair to my several readers

I made a FB comment that I feel it would be unfair of me to deprive you of. A conservative site trumpeted a Chinese immigrant woman's praise of America as the only country founded on universal values. The conservatives swelled with pride at this token of Third World appreciation.

Respondeo dicendum quod:

I have recently concluded that being founded on "universally accepted values" is not a strength but a flaw. Why? Because there are no such things. And also because the Founding Fathers never in their wildest dreams imagined or would have fought for the kind of racial/cultural Tower of Babel being foisted on us precisely in the name of these "values." They do not "unify," they dilute and dissolve.

Nations are extended tribes and tribes are extended families. Holding them all together is a combination of blood and culture. Not some abstract ideology, but real biological and cultural commonality. If you read the Founders, you can see that they were not really "universalists," but limited their interests and vision to men of their own European stock, whose dominance they, unfortunately, just took for granted rather than clearly asserting. The so-called "universal values" are in fact extremely Eurocentric and existed nowhere but in western Europe.

The result is that we are now supposed to believe the completely a-historical idea that America has always been "a creedal nation" for whom race and culture are irrelevant, to the direct detriment of the very people who created the place.

"Unversal values" creates the bizarre situation now where a new arrival to America --even one who broke the law and invaded illegally-- cannot be rejected because he is an alien from an alien culture. To say that immediately makes the native-born American a "racist" in his own homeland.

That is the logical outcome of "universal values," that those to whom the country actually is home and belongs can be instantly rendered illegitimate in it by the latest foreign arrival. This is not George Washington's America; this is Nancy Pelosi's and Barack Hussein Obama's.

Prophet Ex Cathedra

Even though Yogi Berra warned us against the dangers of making predictions, especially about the future, here's one: after he leaves office, Barack Hussein will announce his reversion to Islam. 

I would give it a 50-50 chance of happening

Eternal verities

Conquest's Second Law of Politics goes something like this:

The behavior of any bureaucracy can best be accounted for by assuming that it is actually controlled by a cabal of enemies hostile to the mission it is publicly supposed to serve.

In that uplifting spirit, if you track the performance and many of the utterances of Barry Hussein O, his behavior can best be accounted for by assuming that he is driven by a vengeful hatred against White America and the whole of the White West.  Cf. Dreams From My (Totally Absent and Abandoning) Father.

Happy Juneteenth, Crackers!

Today is "Juneteenth", June 19th in English. It's a Black freedom from slavery holiday. My ex explained it to me once but I don't remember the details.

The worst and most awful day in American history was the day when the first African was brought to this continent. 

The second most fateful and grievously mortal day after that was when the US government lost its last opportunity to save us and gave up on transporting all the liberated Africans either back home or somewhere else far away and separate.

Who can continue to deny that Blacks and Whites, when placed together in the same space, always make each other miserable? Chronically. Increasingly. Tragically. Unavoidably. Insolubly.

All American racial policy in the last 50+ years --much longer if you count Shelly vs Kraemer in 1948 and the Brown vs BOE decision in 1952-- has been to force together two peoples who are deeply incompatible. It comes down simply to this: Beatings will continue until morale improves.

But it will never get improve. Only deteriorate.

What civilization on earth has ever attempted to engineer people's lives and souls toward the kind of impossible equality that most of us take for Gospel?

How can this impasse be expected to improve? I mention only two absolutely factual realities.

One, their average IQ is a full 15 points below ours. This means that 50% of them are dumber than 80% of us. All the treasure spent and laws passed and speeches and ads purveyed will not change that*. (And even if the Flynn effect raises the scores a bit, it raises everyone's, so that gap persists. Does anyone expect that Whites as a group will catch up with the Ashkenazi Jews? Goyim, please.) 

Two, their African r-strategy mating habits and family structures, resulting in an almost 75% illegitimacy rate and a pandemic of fatherless children (the hiphop thugs and their ho's, the pinnacle to which Black culture aspires) , creates an insuperable set of social and personal pathologies that dooms them to the kinds of chaotic communities they "build" wherever they go.

Given just these two items, what hope is there that they can ever be anything other than what they are now?

And now, since the Whites have been fatally infected with the Liberal Guilt retrovirus --and our women have colluded with the Blacks (and others) to stab their own men in the back, aka feminism-- it will only get worse for us.

The Africans in America are only 12% of the population. Yet their endless complaints and ever increasing self-destructiveness are the obsessive center of our decaying and dying "national" life. And their pathologies are always our fault. And they always will be.

Because they are a people incapable of ever becoming what we were. Their envy and resentment, and the knowledge of the truth of the previous sentence, makes them ragingly vengeful. And their allies, who also hate us, are signing up for the kill. The Third World immigrants only recently arrived in droves on our shores have piggy-backed their "oppressions" on the Black Passion Play and Soap Opera, to help in looting and erasing us.

As groups --and that's all the really counts in the end--how can we ever really be anything but mortal enemies?

We are like a sick married couple who carry on decade after decade of acrimony, violence and abuse and mutual loathing but refuse to separate.

As I often suggest, it makes as much sense to try to turn Germany and Poland, Greece and Turkey, China and Japan, Serbia and Bosnia, India and Pakistan, even Spain and Portugal into one "nation" and to make believe that it is anything other than a Frankenstein monster, grotesquely sewn together out of incompatible and grossly mismatched parts. Ask the Rwandans or Yugoslavians about it. Or the Armenians in Turkey. Do I need to go on?

Why is the idea of separate countries for separate peoples suddenly so Beyond The Pale? Imagine all the grief that would have been produced and reproduced if Greece and Turkey had not agreed to a massive population exchange in 1923.

"America" only ever meant White America. And the Africans in America know it. Even as privileged and pampered and appeased and affirmative-actioned and asskissed a Negress as Michelle Obama could not hide her contempt for us, nor, sensing our impotence, feel she needed to hide it. Barry Hussein O sat in Rev Wright's America-hating church for decades. An "American" president who refused to wear the flag. He got the message and he is carrying it out, his dream from his father, with stunning success. Regardless of his birthplace, he is not an American president. He is an African who became the president of America. There is no "we." Never really was.

Europeans and African in America...it was a disastrously unequal match from the beginning, and no amount of counseling (or laws or apologies or programs or sermons or marches or --God fobid!--reparations) can change the fact that is was indeed and always will be a marriage made in hell.

Happy Juneteenth.

--
* To those who maintain, in panicked dogmatic mode, that IQ is environmental, the question remains: how can their group IQ gap diminish when the environments they keep creating are designed to maintain it?

Tonto's Razor again

Mangan's: What mean we, Kemosabe?:

Canadian reactionary Mangan catches Barry Hussein O asserting that he "still believes" that "we are one people."

Oops.

As he points out, if you have to affirm it, then you're not sure of it.

And I don't believe it any longer.

We are just a Second Civil War/War of Secession waiting to happen.



'via Blog this'

Danegeld, Cuban style

Raul Castro: US must return Guantánamo for normal relations | The Miami Herald The Miami Herald:

Like every other leadership in the world with balls, like em or not, the Cuban Communists understand Barry Hussein's "openness" as the weakness that it is.

This is what you get when you make an affirmative akshun hire.

---




'via Blog this'

Pontifications

The Pope and the Precipice - NYTimes.com:

Since I parted ways with Catholicism, I have yet retained a great admiration for it for, among other things, being a bulwark of Western Civilization.

With each passing week, my admiration shrinks.

My dislike of Francis The Talking Pope is not new. As with my dislike of Barry Hussein O, it was quick of onset. Nothing either of them have turned out to be has made me reconsider my attitude.

You have to look twice to see how many fingers he has up.

As far as immigration, crime, redistributing wealth and big government, the so-called 'Justice and Peace' issues, Catholicism is a loss. Indeed, an enemy to the West that it once helped build. Frank's recent equivalizing the death penalty and life imprisonment, though pathetic, is not surprising. The real impetus behind all these moves is that no one should be punished...(unless maybe they are a corrupt capitalist.) Retributive justice should be canned entirely, in favor of what nuns like, restorative justice.

But at least Rome is clear that men and women are not interchangeable and it stood, on paper at least, against the contraceptive mind that is part of what's emptying the world of Whites.

Now it seems that His Hipness wants to impress all the aging cool kids at the NYT and their younger clones at HuffPo by giving in entirely to the absolutely unquestionable dogmas of the White Liberals.
And we know how their kind reward the other Christian churches who have given in...they become the neutered chaplains of their contemptuous masters. After all, when your adversary gives in, what could he possible ever had to teach you?

The man is shockingly confusing. And confusing is the last thing a Bishop of Rome is supposed to be.

PS. A very kind, extremely circumspect and highly orthodox priest, an Anglican recently reconciled to Rome, points out that Francis is talking through his hat...without saying so, of course. That would be disrespectful.

The speech of Pope Francis which I began by quoting, with its initial cautions about closing oneself within the written word and the law, ended with quotations from Canon Law about the Pope's own supreme authority. But canons 749, 331, 332, 333, and 334, all of which he referenced, are, surely, the written word? And, moreover, are they not all written in ... um ... a law book?

A commentor, a layman unconstrained by the Reverend Father's ecclesiastical constraints, opines:

...I daresay the most charitable thing we can say of Pope Francis is he's a man of crude expression who nearly always fails to communicate properly.*..If one takes into consideration his ecclesiastical promotions, demotions, and assorted acts and allowances, I think it's far more likely he is confused and contradictory in his opinions, at minimum.

*Bolding mine.


'via Blog this'

Macro and micro

My inclination to post has lagged of late. I suppose the general malaise following my mother's death is part of it, even when it's not conscious or acute. She was a kind of centripetal force for the six of us remaining siblings. Now with her gone, the centrifugal forces are at work. Natural, I suppose, but unnerving.

On the macro level, I find myself unable to see the trajectory of America or the West in any other light than decline and fall. With increasing speed. I would like to discover that I have overreacted, but no one is making a case for that. They usually just avoid the issue. Unless their idea of "progress" is what's dominating. Their "progress" is my collapse and my sense of alienation only deepens by the day.

I continue to see race as the fundamental, though far from sole, issue. This makes my anti-liberal and beyond-conservative and empirically-based opinions immediately and unspeakably Beyond The Pale for all those living under The Trance of Diversity Macht Frei. "Dass raciss!"

Feminism, LGBTQism, the disability people, hell, even loonies like PETA and unspeakably pathetic "White privilege" and "microaggression" people, all use the Negro Victim as their paradigm and model. The obscene double election of Barry Hussein plays out in politics the plot of Northwest Frontier, a 1959 film set in British India, where the villain on the train finally turns out to be the posing half-breed. He adopts the persona of his European parent while all the time seething in hatred from his Asian half. Remind you of anyone? (At least in the movie, the bad guy gets what he deserves and the liberal learns her lesson.)

Respectable conservatism, hell, even sometimes loopy conservatism a la Rick Perry, shares the suicidal self-limitations and brain viruses of White liberals. People yell about "taking back the country." Who from? The other half of it that wants it this way? Did it ever occur to you that "the country" you want back is gone?

Maybe I should have stuck to philosophy, theology, language and psychology and not paid so much attention to the actual world. Gives me agita.

So I focus as best I can on the micro level, the local and the present, where pleasure and joy can always be found.

----

More transnational nationalism, sorta

Boston Marathon:

The first "American" man to win the Boston Marathon in a display of "humankind" at its best.

We avoid praising Americans for bouncing back, --that would be narrow chauvinist jingoism--so we broaden it to the transnational and post-sexist "humankind" and then make believe that one "Meb Keflezighi" is an American.

But if the president of America's (most recent) name is Barack Hussein Obama, then what the hell, no? Why not?

Nancy Pelosi, if you recall, that fine flower of American wymynhood, reminded us that the more foreign immigrants we have in America, including all the illegal invaders, the more American we are. Someday when all the actual Americans are gone, that Race Which Must Not Be Named, America will finally be itself.

Thus the logic of Liberalism.



'via Blog this'

Two clowns meet

Barry Hussein O and Francis The Talking Pope

Barry Hussein O: Beyond intolerable

Obama pairs Putin with conservatism | The Daily Caller:

Universalism vs Reality.

If there is such a thing as Obama Derangement Syndrome, I plead guilty. He makes me crazy.


'via Blog this'

Duh

Widow of Philadelphia Cop Expresses Outrage over Obama Justice Nominee (Video) | Independent Film, News and Media:

The administration of "Barack Hussein Obama" appoints "Debo Adegbile" who defended "Mumia Abu Jamal."

Big surprise.

And the implosion of what was once America encapsulated in those bizarre alien names.

While we're at it, Somalis at Democrat gathering in Minnesota break out in riot. Somalis. In Minnesota.

Again, it's another encapsulation.

A repeat of 5th century Rome.

'via Blog this'

Not with a bang

This, from a guy who sees himself as an orthodox critic of 8-Point Progressive Christianity, the John Shelby Spong form of Whitebread crypto-UnitarianUniversalism.

"As a person who voted for Barack Obama and watches the Daily Show, I feel as if I have all the equipment that is required of me to be a progressive Christian."

Well, who can argue with that kind of eloquence...and accuracy.

Barack Hussein Obama and Jon Stuart Leibowitz, the bellweathers of progress.



Theological battle language certainly has deteriorated since the Reformation.

Back to drinking my coffee and dreaming of days when men, even Christian men, were not such feckless pussies.


---

Wouldn't ya know

I have expressed my assessment of the "Civil Rights Movement" on this blog by juxtaposing some pictures. The sentimental Norman Rockwell White-Guilt vision vs What We Actually Got Instead.

Turns out that Barry Hussein has the Rockwell hanging outside his office in the White House.

This is contemporary Black Privilege: unearned moral standing. Barry's color is the only reason he is where he is.


---

The Great Black Hope

Media, as did Faustus, sold soul | Victor Davis Hanson 

The late liberal reporter Michael Hastings summed up a typical private session between President Obama and the press during the 2012 campaign: "Everyone, myself included, swooned. Swooned! Head over heels. One or two might have even lost their minds. ... We were all, on some level, deeply obsessed with Obama, crushing hard."

I dare anyone to imagine this kind of hysterical adulation if Obama were White. American elites' "Civil Rights" obsession with Blacks turns into the most grossly pathetic kow-towing, the S&M ecstasy of submission to their massa.  Barry Hussein O is the Numinous Negro.

If you know history, you might recognize this kind of response to one Adolph Hitler, who had an entire nation eating adoringly out of his hand. Many spoke of him in much the same terms as these fetid  and shameful Caucasian journalistas.

I will never forget my 2008 experience of O's power to creepily dissolve grown men into teenage girls:

I had lunch with a psychoanalyst recently, a middle aged straight male. When he talked about "Obama's smile" he looked like he was in love. Here I am, the homo, utterly unmoved by Barry Hussein O's faux-preacher oratory and this guy, who has a visible appreciation for the opposite sex, is smitten. What's wrong with this picture?

'via Blog this'

Dead end

One of the GayPatriot guys, whom I have met, is a bright Libertarian. This means he is not a Conservative, but Conservatives are the only people who give Libertarians the time of day. He told me that seeing humans in terms of race is a dead-end.

He's right.

But not in the way he meant it. He wants to transcend things like race and ethnicity because they stand in the way of his political philosophy, an ideology based on the absolute primacy of the free and ethical individual.

Race is a dead end because there is no way out of it.

My ruminations of late lead me to suspect that the American people once existed because the American people were White Christians...especially and foundationally White Protestants. Blacks were the eternal problem children, a troubled and troublesome minority. Minority.

Once White America gave up the ghost and accepted "Dr"** King, the Black Trojan Horse, into their city, they surrendered their status, their self-confident right to determine what "American" meant, their sense that it was, after all, their country. They all --Liberals and Conservatives alike...at least the "decent" Conservatives-- accepted the suicidal meme that Burnham's Law describes: in the presence of a group they consider less well-off than themselves, they are morally disarmed. The "decent" majority had to dance to the tune of the "suffering" minority. This dance continues to the present day and it is, for us as a people, a Dance of Death.

And now, fifty years later, we have Barack Hussein Obama. Twice. And his travelling menagerie of Holder and Michelle and Susan Rice and the NAACP and SharptonJackson and all their enablers. And the growing Hispanic Invasion that we have given up our moral right to resist. Or even to notice, much less protest, our replacement.

If you look at how things have actually unfolded --not stuck in some Laputan illusion of color blind America where what counts is the content of your character-- it is just as unlikely for Blacks (or, in their wake, Latinos) to really think of themselves as Americans as you'd expect Arabs in Israel to think of themselves as Israelis or as the Irish --even after centuries of inclusion into Great Britain-- to think of themselves as part of the UK or Hungarians to think of themselves as full members of the AustroHungarian Empire, or the Serbs, Bosnians, Croats to think of themselves as Yugoslavians...or the Tibetans to think of themselves as part of China.

Huntington's clash of civilizations is true, both globally and intra-nationally. If you turn Clausewitz on his head, American politics is racial war carried on by different means.

Once the containing lid of White self-confidence and dominance was undone in the second half of the 20th century, what was America began to unravel and what we have now, I suspect, is the formation of eventual new countries based on race. They are alien nations artificially bound by a single government. Unfortunately, they are hugely intertwined, but the only group with any residual allegiance to America are the Whites, and not even all of them.

The experiment was, I now sadly suspect, doomed from the start. Race is indeed a dead end, that is, a limit you can't pass.

**During his life he was usually Rev. That's where a lot of his power came from. Now the Blacks like to call him Dr. Makes him sound smart. And do you think for one minute that if Ex Cathedra had plagiarized his Phd Thesis that he'd still have his doctorate? Yeah, sure.

A fantasy question

I dropped some of my thinking on the comments box* over at Gay Patriot yesterday. Sort of a farewell to conservatism. Not, of course, to submit to Liberalism, but because conservatism does not seem strong enough to oppose it. Contemporary American conservatism is too infected with liberalism, especially their blind adherence to "equality" as a sacred trumps-all value. Their terror at being labelled "racists" --a lost cause-- and their consequent ritual worship of faux-Doctor Martin Luther King, the Black Trojan Horse, is emblematic.

The question behind my comments takes the form of a fantasy (as does so much of Ex Cathedra):



At a press conference some weeks after the 2012 catastrophe presidential election, Mr Romney is on the dais with the other heavies in the Republican Party leadership, Ryan, Boehner, etc. A young reporter gets up and speaks:

Mr. Romney, in the recent election, fully 90% of your votes came from White Americans. 90%. Nine out of ten. And just shy of 60% of White America supported you and your party, a clear majority of that race. And, if only White votes had been counted, you would have won about 40 states out of 50.

Why then, especially in view of our race's approaching minority status in mid-century, will you and your party not take this as a mandate and embrace the important role of being the only mainstream group who can advocate for our race, for White Americans?

---
*PS. The comment, here:

I don’t comment much here, especially in the last year, because I can’t really call myself a gay conservative anymore and I don’t want to abuse GayPatriots’ hospitality.
Conservatism –and by that I do not mean the head-shakingly feckless and useless GOP–has come to seem to me just a rear-guard stalling and losing action hobbled by its acceptance of earlier forms of liberalism, including an attachment to the obsolete and pie-in-the-sky notion of a “colorblind society.” The only people trying to be color-blind are nice White people –The Most Foolish People On The Planet– who are blind to the dynamics of their dispossession and displacement. 

The desire to claim some kind of connection with an imagined color-blind MLK and his “dream” is part of it: conservatives’ terror of facing up to the insolubility of the race issue and forever trying to escape from the inescapable accusation of “racism.” (Which is just like trying to prove you’re not a witch.) 

90% of Mitt Romney’s votes came from White people. 90%. Because conservatives have renounced their original sin of “racism” –the Liberal equivalent of “witchcraft”– they are unable even to think of this as any kind of mandate to advocate for the only people who vote for them, instead pathetically “reaching out” to alien Latinos who resent and will never trust them. “Conservatism” has no electoral base at all outside Whites. The only people who acknowledge that are our enemies. Doesn’t make it any less true. 

“Dr” King –who plagiarized most of his PhD thesis, btw– led a movement that has slipped a knife into the heart of this nation, getting Whites to see themselves as without any moral standing or self-confident racial status, so that they can be manipulated into self-erasure, becoming a plundered minority in the land that their people created. 

“MLK” only cared about his own people. All his sanctimonious blather about “America” was just a means to an end. He has been stunningly successful, especially as a martyr: a once great nation commits suicide over the 13% who have proved themselves, in the last 50 years of vast sums spent and a huge networks of laws and entitlements for them enacted, unable to do much more than self-destruct and blame others for it. 

“Martin” doesn’t belong to you. He belongs to Barack and Oprah and Foxx and Sharpton and Jackson and the NAACP and the Black Caucus. Let him go and look for your own heroes. 

Barack Hussein Obama, twice elected by the “American” people, as loathsome as he is, is just a symptom of a much deeper collapse. “Conservatism” is wholly unable to fix that.

Ex Cathedra VII.5

Ex Cathedra the Seven and a Halfth.

I have sometimes commented critically about King Henry VIII. Even going so low as to suggest that Barry Hussein, the Great and Powerful O, is like him for meddling in the internal affairs of the Church.

But were ExC a consul of the Alternative Post-American Republic,

the depraved civilizational suicidality which is official Catholic "social justice" policy would come under severe State restriction. Pope Francis, whose ego is slathered all over everything he humbly, simply and poorly touches, recently dramatized this grotesque self-erasure by celebrating as martyrs illegal immigrants who die in their attempt to invade Europe. 

The APA Republic would concern itself not at all with the doctrines or beliefs of any religion unless that religion refused to live peacefully and quietly with the State's fundamental rejection of multiculturalism and all its pomps. Islam would be constitutionally banned, of course. An expansionist theocracy is by definition incompatible in any way with a sovereign Western state.

But if the mitered traitors felt the need to take "a prophetic stance" against the Republic's attack on "the fundamental dignity of every human person" ExC the Seven and a Halfth would be happy to provide them with whatever kind of martyrdom they'd prefer. A forest of pontifical gallows along the border, a la Vlad Tepes, might do the trick nicely.

The irony here is that the Church's current game of playing Judas to the culture and peoples that are its foundation is one that it learned from the State. It was not imposed on it, but voluntarily embraced by it, in slavish imitation of the modern liberal regime of tolerance and diversity.

Part of this is the Church's abandonment of the (White) West in favor the Third World, where its demographic future lies. This was apparent to me more than 25 years ago and was part of the pragmatics of my leaving said Church. I knew that it would never take a tolerant stance toward homosexuality when its future was clearly wedded to the peoples of the global South. (Just ask the Church of England.)

What galls me is that a policy of national, cultural and ethnic self-preservation --once the unquestioned common sense of humanity-- is now considered by the supposed intellectual and moral elite to be a crime of the greatest magnitude.

The guilt of every crime committed by illegal immigrants against the native peoples of Europe  --actively by violence or passively by dispossession and cost--, or against the historic American people here, is shared by their political, cultural and religious enablers.

His Grace, the Consul Ex Cathedra, would be happy to serve as the hand of justice for them.

---
*Adding to the irony and paradox is that ExC is also finding himself in the company of Pope Piux IX, as well as Henry VII. Is this hyper-enantiodromia?


---

Another day in Rainbow America

The crime sheet in the SF Examiner described an assault in the Bayview. And, amazingly, it gave the races of the two men involved. Which it never does. Why? Both of them are Black, including the 75-year-old victim of a younger man. So I guess that makes it not raciss and ok to say.

One of Barry Hussein O's appointees, former head of the Congressional Black Caucus, lets us know that he'd disenfranchise a majority of Whites because he thinks their racist honky asses would never vote for a Black man.

The Washington Post pretends not to know this about him, and wants to make sure that we don't either.

See? Mr O does not think that Mr Watt's opinions are a reason to avoid giving his brutha a big Federal job. Does that tell you anything about Barry? And what he thinks of you and your honky white ass? And what your real "White privilege" means? They got themselves a Black president, twice. And only because 40% of the Caucasians helped them. And still these thugs are never satisfied. Never will be, either. Never.

I'd like to see if any of the White House press corps bring this up. Yeah, right.

--