Days Black People Not Re-Enslaved By Trump

Sunday, February 12, 2017

Court Coup

Anyone paying attention knows that the court system or justice system [sic] has been wandering out it's lane frequently of late. If the courts were a Tesla, every warning ding and light would be going off and perhaps the car would have pulled itself over and come to a stop. Market Ticker shares my concern about how bad this has gotten:
Folks, you may agree or disagree with the action Trump took. This Ticker isn't about that.

It's about the willful, intentional and unconstitutional acts of the 9th Circuit that continue a long tradition in the US Court system of acting as if controlling law, including the Constitution, does not exist whenever it suits some particular group of people.

Any government body that does such a thing by accident must be called out. If it was an accident then said body will immediately correct its mistake.

Any government body that does such a thing through evidenced intent must be disbanded and removed from power. If it is not, when such a means exists (and it certainly does, as the Constitution gives the power to Congress to disband or reorganize any part of the court system; the only Constitutionally-required court is the Supreme Court) then all such co-conspiring components of the government have declared themselves illegitimate.

The point about whether one agrees with Trump or not is THE bedrock point here. Justice isn't about what policies you like. Justice is about the proper and consistent application of the law. Period. If the law is simply a suggestion, then no law has to be observed. And mind you I think there are many laws that are in fact "suggestions" in practice. No, actually they are a form of state taxes as a lottery. Think speed limits on highways. Almost nobody does the posted speed limit. Modern technology makes it entirely possible to fine each and every person on a highway who is speeding. It isn't done because if everyone got a fine in the mail, there would be an uprising like we've never seen before. But this is beyond the point.

Point here is that the 9th circuit as well as recent decisions by the Supreme Court, among others (1),(2),(3) shows a distinct hostility to the constitutional rights of citizens in the service of liberal ideology.

In case one thinks me unqualified to speak on legal matters, see The Hill :

Whether or not a particular judge or panel of judges likes the policy judgment made by the president, it is the president, not the judge, who was elected to make that decision.

Indeed, the notion that a single federal trial court judge can take it upon himself to determine national security and immigration policy, in the face of explicit determinations made by the president with the full support of law actually adopted by Congress, is so far beyond the judicial role as to pose a serious threat, not just to our national security, but to the rule of law.

That a panel of the 9th Circuit affirmed the order does not place it on more solid footing but rather merely expands the lawlessness to a higher court. One can only hope that the Supreme Court will put a stop to this usurpation, and quickly.

Otherwise, we as a nation have a much bigger problem to confront than terrorists seeking entry to the United States.

And speaking of the 9th Circuit. I understand that north of 75% of its decisions are reversed on appeal. 75%. If you had an employee that did their job incorrectly 75% of the time, would you still employ that person? If you had a contractor who did work on your property and 75% of his work had to be revisited by another contractor, would you hire that contractor again? I think that if a court is full of personnel that cannot do their basic job, those persons should be removed from their jobs.

Now I'm all for respecting the decisions of the court. But that support is predicated upon the courts doing their jobs correctly 99% of the time. If the courts are not going to do their jobs properly, then as predicted by the founders, good men will not see the point of being law abiding. We know where that leads.

Sunday, February 05, 2017

Black America: These Are Your Leaders

If you want to know why Black America is still in the shit, you can look at one large reason right here:

Remember, Black on Black crime is a thing. And so long as it is a thing, you're going to have large police presences in black communities. Never mind that "police violence" against those who are not committing or have not committed a crime represents less than 4% of police "violence". Look! Squirrel!

Furthermore when we talk about schooling, IQ is a thing. Until Black America tosses this mis-leadership class that makes a living infantilizing black folks and diverting attention from our own group failures by blaming "nazis" and "white nationalists", which the recent riots have proven are NOT in charge, Black folks will continue to see high levels of disfunction. As a podcaster said, Incentives drive behavior.

Thursday, February 02, 2017

This Is War

You need to understand. This is the first US election in my lifetime where violence occurred before and after an election. This is the first election in my lifetime that representatives of government, up to the sitting president (that would be Obama in this reference) did NOTHING to stop or punish this clearly politically motivated violence. We have celebrities among other lefty types openly calling for assasination of a sitting president. We have a celebrity calling for a military coup. We have officers of the court being openly partial. We have those charged with upholding the law directing their subordinates to not uphold the law.

We have fire in the streets. We have bloodied American citizens. We have journalists and "reputable newspapers' who are openly advocating physical violence against those they have deemed "nazis" (which could be anyone to the right or Mao). This is war. And lets be clear here, since the state, with it's monopoly on legal violence is utterly failing in it's duty to ruthlessly suppress this street violence. Since universities have become breeding grounds of traitors and sedition posing as "black studies", "Latin studies" and "gender studies". Where students are free to harass other students and faculty without repercussion Since it is clear that those of us who are not among the left are "fair game" for criminal assault, then it is clear that if you are not among the left, that you should be prepared to defend your life, limb and property by any means necessary. Do not believe for one minute that the sign you see above is merely hype. This is deadly serious. recognize.

Wednesday, February 01, 2017

DNC: Sharia Compliant

Under Sharia and/or simple "rules of Islam" it is forbidden to insult the prophet and criticising Islam is blasphemy. In a Christian (or other non-Islamic country) such rules wouldn't mean more than the dust on the street. If one is NOT a Muslim, such rules are non-binding since you haven't agreed to adhere to them. In America, a nation founded by Christians, the framers made sure that the people had both freedom of religion AND freedom of speech (including the right to speak against any religion) were part of the sovereign document. This is important because we are now seeing just how far the DNC (and leftists in general) are down the rabbit hole of submission to Islam.
Vincent Tolliver, who previously ran an unsuccessful campaign for Congress in Arkansas, told The Hill in an email he didn’t believe his rival Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn) should become chairman because of his Islamic faith, citing the religion’s positions on homosexuality.

“His being a Muslim is precisely why DNC voters should not vote for him. Muslims discriminate against gays. Islamic law is clear on the subject, and being gay is a direct violation of it. In some Muslim countries, being gay is a crime punishable by death,” Tolliver wrote.

“Clearly, Mr. Ellison is not the person to lead the DNC or any other organization committed to not discriminating based on gender identity or sexual orientation. I’m shocked [the Human Rights Campaign] has been silent on the issue. A vote for Representative Ellison by any member of the DNC would be divisive and unconscionable, not to mention counterproductive to the immediate and necessary steps of rebuilding the Democratic Party,” he continued.

For stating this, Tolliver was expelled from the DNC. I suppose he should be happy he was not beheaded while being recorded on video. If the DNC had any respect for the constitution of the country it tries to get people elected to serve, it would have simply allowed it's voting members to not vote for him as their show of disapproval and move along.

Oh, and this from an organization that was ready to use Bernie Sanders' Jewish heritage against him.

Sharia compliant DNC.

Russell Simmons Shows Us A True Face Of Liberals

Here's Russell Simmons:
Def Jam Records founder Russell Simmons, who once called himself an “every weekend” guest at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate, claims his friendship with Trump has ended.

When asked by the New York Daily News if his relationship with Trump is still ongoing, Simmons said, “Not anymore, I’m sure he doesn’t consider me a friend after some of the statements I’ve made.”

See Trump, or anyone else, is allllll good while they [apparently] agree with you or keep their mouths shut. Now Simmon's could have supported Hillary and still be a friend of Trump. All he could have said was: "Hey, yeah, I don't agree with your politics but you've never disrespected me..." But nope. Apparently Simmons (who I really don't pay attention to) felt the need to toss his friendship over politics. And understand that he isn't the only one. And it's not only friendships.

According to The Hill, Simmons said, “I said, ‘I’d rather Kim Kardashian be president,’ so he called the office and that was the end of our friendship.” Simmons says he declined to take Trump’s call.
Lets just understand this statement. Kardashian is famous because she fucked a black celebrity on tape. The entirety of her "fame" is for wearing dresses, going to parties and posting pictures and videos of herself and lastly being married to Kanye West.

That's all.

Meanwhile the sitting president, turned a $1 million dollar investment into a billion dollar fortune. Rode the ups and downs of the NY real estate market and despite having serious financial setbacks (and it is through failures that we learn), came back on top and then ran a successful presidential campaign despite all his "friends" and supporters from his previous life, take repeated and public shits on him.

And this man would prefer Kim K for president.

This is why a great deal of us have come to realize that celebrities are worth NOTHING more than the entertainment they provide us and in this day and technological age, we don't have to pay to see their work or hear their music.

Tuesday, January 31, 2017

The Party Of Traitors

Last year I kept hammering on the subject that the DNC has essentially become the party of traitors. They had internalized and integrated so many persons who are by and large, so mad at white males, that they have no duty to country or other citizens. While this used to be the provence of small minded first level "conscious" black folks, in the 8 years since Obama took office, it mastasticized to the rest of the left like a swiftly moving cancer cell. Since Trump has followed through on his wall and "ban", the left has dropped the mask and with it all pretense of patriotism and civic duty to other citizens. The treason is in full view of the public and they are so arrogant and so haughty and believe in their own infallibility that they do not even believe there will be any public consequences for their actions.

Here is Bill de Blasio, Mayor of NYC:

This traitor here said:
“We’re not going to see families torn apart over a very minor offense,” the mayor told Tapper

“But is grand larceny or drunk driving a very minor offense?” Tapper asked.

“Drunk driving that doesn’t lead to any other negative outcome, I could define as that,” de Blasio responded.

Let us understand. de Blasio believes that the law shouldn't apply to illegal immigrants. Imagine you, Mr Citizen getting pulled over at a DUI patrol stop and were caught with an illegal alcohol level in your blood. Can you imagine telling a police officer that since there was no "negative outcome" you should be free to go? What about Eric Garner? He didnt' sell a legal product to children. There was no "negative outcome" to his actions. He's dead.

It's time we start asking these lefties about their alleged support of "Black Lives Matter" when they don't think they or illegal immigrants ought to be subject to the same laws as citizens are. Lets not forget that it is a crime to simply be in the country without permission.

And lets be clear, De Blasio and his ilk don't even think that an illegal immigrant should be deported if they commit a "negative outcome" because De Blasio and his ilk have been releasing known illegal immigrant criminals out due to "sanctuary city" policies.

This brings me to Jeff Sessions. I believe the REAL reason why Democrats are doing everything they can to not confirm Sessions is because their lawyers have told them, in private no doubt, that by their own actions and statements they are criminally liable for breaking federal immigration law. They have seen in the past week that Trump is not like any president since maybe FDR. He will follow through on his promises. They see the writing on the wall. Perp walks have a high probability of happening should Sessions be confirmed. They know this. They are like teenagers who had the house to themselves and didn't realize the parents just pulled in the driveway. The party is over. The adults are back and the traitors are going to be dealt with.

I urge all Democrats, particularly the black ones who may be reading this to seriously think upon the party you are aligned with. The lines are very brightly lit here. The only question you need to answer is "how many citizens are you willing to have maimed, killed, unemployed or underemployed in order to support DNC policies?" Any answer higher than 0 makes you a traitor.

Sunday, January 29, 2017

Judge Ann Donnelly: Unconstitutional Decision

Judge Donnelly following the example of certain Supreme Court justices [sic] made a ruling that is in direct contradiction to the law as passed by Congress:
(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline.
I'd underline the relevant parts, but the entire section is clear on it's face. This judge had no standing whatsoever to interfere with the lawful execution of powers granted to the president by Congress.

Understand that this is behavior fits into the larger treasonous pattern of behavior that has been normalized under Obama and festering in Democrats since Bill Clinton left office. They are making themselves known now that Trump has dropped the hammer on sanctuary cities. You have elected officials who took an oath of office, such as the one for NYS:

[Oath of office; no other test for public office]

Section 1. Members of the legislature, and all officers, executive and judicial, except such inferior officers as shall be by law exempted, shall, before they enter on the duties of their respective offices, take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the constitution of the United States, and the constitution of the State of New York, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of ......, according to the best of my ability;" and no other oath, declaration or test shall be required as a qualification for any office of public trust, except that any committee of a political party may, by rule, provide for equal representation of the sexes on any such committee, and a state convention of a political party, at which candidates for public office are nominated, may, by rule, provide for equal representation of the sexes on any committee of such party. (Amended by Constitutional Convention of 1938 and approved by vote of the people November 8, 1938.)

Who are out there absolutely violating said oaths and the public, well left leaning public, loves it.

It comes down to this. Either we follow the laws and have an orderly society or we have a society in which laws are enforced on the whim of whoever holds office. The latter encourages lawlessness and resistance to legitimate enforcement of law (see BLM). The former forces us to accept things that may not be emotionally pleasant but necessary. Children avoid the emotionally unpleasant. Adults accept them as a part of life. An adult is in the White house and he is dealing with children in various offices.

Friday, January 27, 2017

The Shock And Awe of Masculine Leadership

The first president I remember was Carter. I liked him because he seemed nice. I thought "nice" was a good quality. I was child. I didn't know better. Like many children of the 70's and beyond, I grew up in a single, mother lead household. This meant that ale authority in the home was a foreign concept to me. I never had to negotiate a father. Men who came to the house knew to be "nice" to me in order to stay on good terms with my mother, except one. I hated him. The one male figure that was there in the later years, an uncle, was "nice". A provider was still dependent upon my mother for shelter. The only other male "authority figures" I knew were the few male teachers I had in school who's ability to punish was very limited and elders and pastors in the church I attended. Most of those men were "nice" and very few of them, well actually only one, commanded any respect from me whatsoever.

I say all this to point out that Americans by and large are unfamiliar with strong male leadership. Obama was a very passive, feminine president. His way of handling conflict was very feminine in that it was the passive aggressive type rather than direct and confrontational. It worked for him because many Americans are really only familiar with that kind of man. I was always off put by an Obama that crossed his legs. In my opinion, men crossing their legs is an extremely feminine act. It goes against our anatomy (we have narrow hips not wide ones) and the idea of not allowing my testicles and penis space to hang out, bothers me. If you noticed, Obama would change to "legs open" when dealing with more masculine people, though he would occasionally fall back to crossing his legs. This was one of the things that struck me about Trump. I have not seen Trump sit with his legs crossed. Now it may have happened but I haven't witnessed it. When I saw that, I knew we were dealing with alpha. Now let me get to the point of all this.

Since Trump has taken office, he has executed a number of items that he said he would execute. This has had the effect of shocking the public because they have been used to cucked "leadership" that put's its fingers in the wind to find out which way to go. It will be but a short amount of time before mayors and governors, among others realize that they are not dealing with some beta, approval seeking male as president. They are dealing with a stone cold alpha male. A lot of the noise we're hearing from left leaning women is because they understand that they hold exactly ZERO sway over alpha men. Alpha men could give a fuck about any particular woman's approval (aside from perhaps his mother and even THAT is limited). And when it comes to a group of women he has no sexual interest in, who serve no purpose to him, that is, NOT PRODUCTIVE, he doesn't give them the time of day. These women know this. This why a bunch of them marched all over the US. They are scared to death that the gig is up. They are not really afraid of Trump himself. They are afraid that his success would be seen as an example by other men whom they have been able to emotionally and financially manipulate.

And so this feminized country where "he wouldn't dare" is a common refrain, Trump's willingness to build the wall has shocked the public. That he will make Mexico pay for it (by any number of means) is also shocking to them. They are all saying "he can't do that!" Well yes he can and he can because he has the will to execute. This will to execute is what has been lacking in the Republican party. They are still behaving as cucks with their howls about The Wall and sanctuary cities because they have been trained to seek approval before executing. As I said earlier, these folks are going to realize that they are dealing with an actual man.

For example, when Trump announced that the government exists to serve the "citizens". it is a reformulation of "this is my home, this is my castle, these are my people and I decide who gets to come in and who gets to stay." It is a very masculine statement that could never have come out of Obama's mouth or any Democrat for that matter. And understand that the ISIS Jihadis and other countries where men are not nearly as cucked recognizes this. Males ALWAYS recognize the higher status male and very few have the guts to stand up to him to take his crown. See for all their talk about "unfit to serve" as president, the opposition only shows that they are unfit to run any business. You cannot run a large successful business that regularly takes risks without being willing to execute. You cannot run such a large enterprise without the large balls to negotiate from a position of strength or the appearance of strength. To people who are unaccustomed to risk and live the "need approval" life, these things are absolutely alien. However; to those of us who know, we recognize this.

The left has tried to vilify alpha behavior as "hyper-masculine" and "bullying" (mind you there is such a thing as bullying but that's a different convo). In this way, masculine behavior: taking charge, executing, not bending to female emotional blackmail for example, is seen as negative. This is why these women's marches have many many males (many of whom raised by single mothers) that speak so much gibberish about rights their wives already have or how the government rather than them, should be providing for their wives and [usually] female children. And I note the female children because many times when I hear men trying to cuck other men, they lead with "I have daughters".

And? That you have a daughter is no excuse to try to enslave other people's male children.

So yes, this new administration is going to be a master class in manliness for a lot of boys and young men who have not seen such examples on TV (where simpering, idiot males rule) or in their lives. There will be errors and mistakes. They happen but even those will be lessons in how men should handle fails.