Category Archives: Democrats

UPDATED (11/10/021): To Stay In The Political Game, Republicans Always Show They’re Black-Focused

Argument, COVID-19, Crime, Democrats, IMMIGRATION, Race, Racism

For the longest time, the American People—an inchoate concept, really—have endured great wrongs. Examples of these wrongs are en masse immigration, open-borders, dispossessing multilateral trade deals, and now vaccine mandates.

Ubiquitous black-on-white crime inflicted by a coddled criminal class, native born and imported energetically, is high on the list of state and corporate crimes against the citizenry.

Whether he postures on TV or on the Hill—the arguments advanced by the typical Republican frontman against these defining depredations are, however, empty.

It has been my ongoing goal in this space to alert the voter to this void. The “objections” put forth by Republicans in defense of their constituency are all theater, farce, to be precise.

These empty arguments are mirrored, for example, in my exposing, in February of 2019, the fact that, “Every time a manifestly racist, anti-white event goes down, which is frequently, conservative media and politicians call it ‘identity politics.’ ‘The left is playing identity politics,’ they intone. “They are dividing us.” “Whatever is convulsing the country,” I explained, “it’s not identity politics, but purely anti-white politics.

So, identify the bogus argument—and you will have exposed the frauds who want you to send them to live off the fleshpots in Rome-on-the-Potomac. (It has been pointed out to me correctly that “the comparison to Rome [is unfair]. [A]fter all, Rome built two great civilizations and is a site of enormous cultural significance.”)

Although not exclusive to him, my example today comes from Fox News’s Jesse Watters. When speaking loudly OVER his guest, Jesse Watters made the usual Republican straw argument against black crime. You hear it from Hannity and the rest all the time:

Democrats “only care when a white person takes a black life. If a black person takes a black life, they don’t even care at all.”

Seldom mentioned in Republican argumentation is the REAL HATE CRIME IN THE ROOM: black-on-white crime which is invariably not reported, or if reported masked as something other than what it really is, which is systemic, white hot hatred of whites.

Republicans can’t protect besieged whites and are forever searching their pea brains for ways to show off their Abe Lincoln pedigree.

Having originated the popular meme “Democrats are the real racists” back in 2014, I’ll argue that the line, “Democrats don’t care that blacks are killing blacks,” is a species of the “Democrats are the real racists” fatuity.

In this way, by showing how black-focused and caring they are—Republicans hang on to respectability and on to the good graces of Democrats by the hairs of their chiny chin-chin. The empty ‘arguments’ of Republican frontmen are a way to stay in the political game.

UPDATED (11/10/021):  The latest in this genre comes courtesy of Johnny-Come-Lately conservative J. D. Vance, who had shunned Trump, but found religion on the president’s  populism, when it became politically expedient:

“I don’t care if we are talking about a little black girl in 1965, or a little white girl in 2021, telling a little girl that she is evil because of her skin color, is disgusting and vile.”

These words were spoken at a conference of self-anointed leaders of national conservatism.

See, but this is not 1965. And the victims of white-hot hatred are white, not black. To Republicans, it is impossible to mention white suffering without dragging in the “black experience.”

This is a vintage Republican habit: Using weasel words to sound fair and impartial.

Please Search Out “Argument”  (https://barelyablog.com/category/argument/) and “Republicans” (https://barelyablog.com/category/republicans/) on the blog’s Search box to follow this thread over years. Cite your source, of course!

* Image credit The New Yorker

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott MUST Stand His Ground, Uphold Texans’ Natural Rights

Constitution, COVID-19, Democrats, Federalism, Healthcare, Individual Rights, Law, Natural Law, The State

Natural rights antedate the state apparatus. It matters not who restores or upholds authentic negative, individual rights violated—state or federal authority—just so long as someone does.

So, “Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s executive order banning vaccine mandates in the state” is the correct thing to have done.

The entire legal community knows only the positive, state law, and cares nothing for the natural law, meagerly embodied in the Bill of Rights. This is why all “legal experts” are quite pleased to defer to the  Supremacy Clause abomination—it allows the State to subordinate  your natural rights as an American to the UN—in dismissing Abbot’s move.

Abbott’s move puts him at odds with some large corporations and with the Biden administration, which last month announced plans to require all employers with 100 or more workers to adopt vaccine mandates or testing regimens. A number of large private companies in Texas have issued mandates. (WaPo)

Said one “expert”:

…the supremacy clause to the Constitution says that federal law is the ‘supreme’ law of the land, and state laws give way to it” …. “The state mandate is of no effect in that case.”

In fact, as noted in the “CRADLE OF CORRUPTION” (2002),

“The Constitution is the thin edge of the wedge that has allowed U.S. governments to cede the rights of Americans to the UN. Specifically, the ‘Supremacy Clause’ in Article VI [even] states that all treaties made by government shall be “the supreme Law of the Land,” and shall usurp state law. Article VI has thus further compounded the loss of individual rights in the U.S.

Unless Abbot stands his ground (metaphorically, because the governor is wheelchair-bound).

Too hell with the Constitution; nobody follows it anyway, least of all the lawless, no-borders, White Lives Don’t Matter, licentious Democrats.

The Democrats’ Worldview Distilled

COVID-19, Cultural Marxism, Democrats, English, Free Speech, IMMIGRATION, Race, Racism, Socialism

As I noted on August 8, 2019, during the Democratic debates, the worldview of the Democrats curdled into ruthlessly radical formulations, which they did not hide:

“End Anglo-America. Welcome The World. Evict the unborn and the native born. English is your second language.”

“Race—more accurately, anti-white politics—is [to be ] the Democrats’ central cri de coeur. They have no other passion other than hounding and excommunicating others for what are thought crimes—for thinking, speaking or tweeting in politically unpleasing ways.”

Drain and dry the Rio Grande! Level the land to ease the passage of Central America into North America. Let them come in their millions, no, in their billions. Decriminalize crossings. Disband ICE. Deify DACA. Deny no asylum claim. Table a marshal plan for Central America. Immigrants are America. In fact, immigrants are Americans, only better and more inspiring. All Democrats want more refugees.

Democrat women—many of them having since assumed their place as overlords in the Covid Cartel—alternate between the roles of shrew, scold and bully (of whites, in particular).

They all adhere to a “pathological, self-immolating progressivism … and an unspoken pack hierarchy is apparent among them, that pecking order being racial. The culturally more exotic are the undeclared top dogs. The commonplace, palefaced are the political underdogs, with little street cred.

In “Dem’s Dystopia: End Anglo-America, Welcome the World, Evict the Unborn.”

NEW COLUMN: ‘Whip Or Rein’ Was Never The Question

Argument, Democrats, Hebrew Testament, Homeland Security, IMMIGRATION, Left-Liberalism, Nationhood, Republicans

NEW COLUMN is “In Praise Of Whipping Horsemen: ‘Whip Or Rein’ Was Never The Question.” It’s now on WND.COM, The Unz Review, CNSNews.com,
The New American, and American Greatness.

Excerpt:

Let’s see: Heroic horsemen rode to the rescue at Del Rio, Texas, along the U.S.-Mexico border. Republicans could’ve whipped the open-border Democrat degenerates with a first-principles case for sovereignty and self-defense, the thing Border Patrol horsemen were exercising so instinctively. Instead, the Right chose to beat around the bush, sweating the redundant details:

“Was it a whip or a rein?”

Who cares, when our border-patrol heroes—the last of the He-Men—were doing the work of the Lord! And, what on earth is wrong with the whip, in this context?

Did not the Lord teach—in The Book of Proverbs, through his emissaries—that, “He who spares his rod hates his son”? I believe Proverbs has a broader and deeper meaning: Libertine formative figures who fail to teach the young and the lawless right from wrong hate both their disciples and the society upon which they unleash them.

Let’s rewind: The reference is, as CNN put it, to “recent images that appear to show U.S. Border Patrol agents on horseback confronting migrants along the Rio Grande.”

“Videos taken by Al Jazeera and Reuters … show law enforcement officers on horseback using aggressive tactics when confronting migrants, who [were] largely Haitian, to prevent them from crossing into the US.”

So far so good.

“The Biden administration expressed horror,” promising to proceed aggressively against the poor horseback officers, who work in near-impossible conditions, without institutional support and for meager wages.

How does the Right respond? Republicans responded with a weak refrain: “Was it a whip or a rein?” they bickered. The horse-riding Border Patrol agents were wielding a rein, not a whip, was the sum of our side’s “case” in defense of our guardian agents.

That’s the anatomy of a typical Republican retort. It’s also why Democrats are the perennial winners.

There is only one winning—and correct—answer, in the case of the whip versus the rein, and it is this:

If it was not a whip, it ought to have been one, and if our Guardian Angel of the border used a rein as whip—then hooray for him. The End….

… READ THE REST of  “In Praise Of Whipping Horsemen: ‘Whip Or Rein’ Was Never The Question” on WND.COM, The Unz Review, CNSNews.com,
The New American and American Greatness.