| Entry | Pageviews | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Feb 10, 2020
|
1
| |||||||||
Feb 11, 2020
|
1
| |||||||||
1
| ||||||||||
Feb 10, 2020
|
1
| |||||||||
1
| ||||||||||
1
| ||||||||||
1
| ||||||||||
1
| ||||||||||
1
|
BOOMERBUSTER
OLD CELLO
Tuesday, February 11, 2020
NYT LIBERACE LEONHARDT RIDICULOUS AND CYNICAL PANDERING
THE NYT IS THE LAST CANDIDATE FOR ECONOMIC PATRIOT.
RATHER LIIKE CALLING THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS AN AMERICAN ECONOMIC PATRIOT ORGANIZATION
DAVID BROOKS PATRIOTISM
Terms search: David Brooks patriot
DAVID BROOKS PATRIOTISM
Terms search: David Brooks patriot
Monday, February 10, 2020
A LOT OF WHITE LIBERALS THINK THEY ARE AUTHORITIES ON WHAT IS A GOOD LOOKING NEGRO OR ASIAN
Trust me, this is the biggest bunch of hot reeking bullshit one can imagine, from the point of view of negroes or Asians.
BEING A WHITE MALE GAY PYGMY IS OK BEING A BIG OF COLOR IS NOT
Biden's ad, which has been viewed four million times since it was posted on Twitter on Saturday, launched a scathing attack on Mr Buttigieg, comparing his own achievements as vice-president to his opponent's record as mayor of the city of South Bend.
The video claimed that Mr Buttigieg had fired a black police chief and forced out a black fire chief during his time as mayor.
"The vice president's decision to run this ad speaks more to where he currently stands in this race than it does about Pete's perspective as a mayor and veteran," Mr Buttigieg's national press secretary responded.
CHINA HAS ALL YOUR EQUIFAX DATA AND A WHOLE LOT MORE YOU BITCH
It's your political and market system.
If China or anyone has your data, it's your fault.
They can indict Xi if they want, but you can take what I say to the bank.
Equifax needed to be wound up, its employees sold into slavery in Africa, and its management sent to Siberia at their expense.
If China or anyone has your data, it's your fault.
They can indict Xi if they want, but you can take what I say to the bank.
Equifax needed to be wound up, its employees sold into slavery in Africa, and its management sent to Siberia at their expense.
NIGERIA POWDER KEG OF NEGRO RELIGIOUS WAR
100 million Muslims in the North, 100 million Christians in the South.
My preference is for a big battallion of Chinese to go in there and pacify them.
My preference is for a big battallion of Chinese to go in there and pacify them.
Sunday, February 9, 2020
NIGERIA HAS LARGEST NUMBER NEGRO MUSLIMS IN AFRICA
Why would you want to import an enormous bunch of these bitches?
Their fucking numbers are enormous, even by African standards..........................
About 100 million Muslims, not counting the 100 million so called faux Protestant christians, most of them both near starvation.
How many of them would you want?
They are a dime a dozen.
Their fucking numbers are enormous, even by African standards..........................
About 100 million Muslims, not counting the 100 million so called faux Protestant christians, most of them both near starvation.
How many of them would you want?
They are a dime a dozen.
VERY FEW LIBERAL POLITICIANS TURNED AND FACED RACIAL MIGRATION INUNDATION
They have been very ill equiped to deal with it, and this has given license to rightist racists and to the break up of liberal multinational institutions in the West, unable to deal with strength and discipline against such a tidal wave of illegal migrants of colors.
The very short term and short sighted benefits of cheap labor of color has been mainly sited in countries of color where labor costs have been low.
Migrants of color present for Western economies more problems of all kinds than the cheapness of this ingenue labor supply represents.
You can bemoan the lack of folks of color, or the faux sister in arms feminine gender, at the Oscars; or give the best picture to South Koreans of socialist leanings, and use a Korean translator at our own Academy Awards ceremony, but the faux hard realities of American domestic melting pot liberalism are now, and increasingly, very small potatoes against the background of the avalanche of peoples of all colors but white now inundating all Western states now for decades with no strong signs of restraints.
No wonder that various European states are turning right: what choice have they been given under their governments?
It is worse than the situation under the Weimar Republic for nations still caught, and less able to manoeuvre regarding their borders and migration decisions, in the EU net.
The very short term and short sighted benefits of cheap labor of color has been mainly sited in countries of color where labor costs have been low.
Migrants of color present for Western economies more problems of all kinds than the cheapness of this ingenue labor supply represents.
You can bemoan the lack of folks of color, or the faux sister in arms feminine gender, at the Oscars; or give the best picture to South Koreans of socialist leanings, and use a Korean translator at our own Academy Awards ceremony, but the faux hard realities of American domestic melting pot liberalism are now, and increasingly, very small potatoes against the background of the avalanche of peoples of all colors but white now inundating all Western states now for decades with no strong signs of restraints.
No wonder that various European states are turning right: what choice have they been given under their governments?
It is worse than the situation under the Weimar Republic for nations still caught, and less able to manoeuvre regarding their borders and migration decisions, in the EU net.
TOCQUEVILLE DEMOCRACY FOREIGN POLICY AND DIPLOMACY EXCERPT
But a democracy is unable to regulate the details of an important undertaking, to persevere in a design, and to work out its execution in the presence of serious obstacles. It cannot combine its measures with secrecy, and it will not await their consequences with patience. These are qualities which more especially belong to an individual or to an aristocracy; and they are precisely the means by which an individual people attains to a predominant position.
TOCQUEVILLE ON AMERICAN DIPLOMACY AND FOREIGN POLICY
Conduct Of Foreign Affairs By The American Democracy
Direction given to the foreign policy of the United States by Washington and Jefferson – Almost all the defects inherent in democratic institutions are brought to light in the conduct of foreign affairs – Their advantages are less perceptible.
We have seen that the Federal Constitution entrusts the permanent direction of the external interests of the nation to the President and the Senate, [15r] which tends in some degree to detach the general foreign policy of the Union from the control of the people. It cannot therefore be asserted with truth that the external affairs of State are conducted by the democracy.
The policy of America owes its rise to Washington, and after him to Jefferson, who established those principles which it observes at the present day. Washington said in the admirable letter which he addressed to his fellow-citizens, and which may be looked upon as his political bequest to the country: “The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence, she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities. Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people, under an efficient government, the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel. Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor, or caprice? It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it; therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense; but in my opinion it is unnecessary, and would be unwise, to extend them. Taking care always to keep ourselves, by suitable establishments, in a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.” In a previous part of the same letter Washington makes the following admirable and just remark: “The nation which indulges towards another an habitual hatred or an habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest.”
The political conduct of Washington was always guided by these maxims. He succeeded in maintaining his country in a state of peace whilst all the other nations of the globe were at war; and he laid it down as a fundamental doctrine, that the true interest of the Americans consisted in a perfect neutrality with regard to the internal dissensions of the European Powers.
Jefferson went still further, and he introduced a maxim into the policy of the Union, which affirms that “the Americans ought never to solicit any privileges from foreign nations, in order not to be obliged to grant similar privileges themselves.”
These two principles, which were so plain and so just as to be adapted to the capacity of the populace, have greatly simplified the foreign policy of the United States. As the Union takes no part in the affairs of Europe, it has, properly speaking, no foreign interests to discuss, since it has at present no powerful neighbors on the American continent. The country is as much removed from the passions of the Old World by its position as by the line of policy which it has chosen, and it is neither called upon to repudiate nor to espouse the conflicting interests of Europe; whilst the dissensions of the New World are still concealed within the bosom of the future.
The Union is free from all pre-existing obligations, and it is consequently enabled to profit by the experience of the old nations of Europe, without being obliged, as they are, to make the best of the past, and to adapt it to their present circumstances; or to accept that immense inheritance which they derive from their forefathers – an inheritance of glory mingled with calamities, and of alliances conflicting with national antipathies. The foreign policy of the United States is reduced by its very nature to await the chances of the future history of the nation, and for the present it consists more in abstaining from interference than in exerting its activity.
It is therefore very difficult to ascertain, at present, what degree of sagacity the American democracy will display in the conduct of the foreign policy of the country; and upon this point its adversaries, as well as its advocates, must suspend their judgment. As for myself I have no hesitation in avowing my conviction, that it is most especially in the conduct of foreign relations that democratic governments appear to me to be decidedly inferior to governments carried on upon different principles. Experience, instruction, and habit may almost always succeed in creating a species of practical discretion in democracies, and that science of the daily occurrences of life which is called good sense. Good sense may suffice to direct the ordinary course of society; and amongst a people whose education has been provided for, the advantages of democratic liberty in the internal affairs of the country may more than compensate for the evils inherent in a democratic government. But such is not always the case in the mutual relations of foreign nations.
Foreign politics demand scarcely any of those qualities which a democracy possesses; and they require, on the contrary, the perfect use of almost all those faculties in which it is deficient. Democracy is favorable to the increase of the internal resources of the State; it tends to diffuse a moderate independence; it promotes the growth of public spirit, and fortifies the respect which is entertained for law in all classes of society; and these are advantages which only exercise an indirect influence over the relations which one people bears to another. But a democracy is unable to regulate the details of an important undertaking, to persevere in a design, and to work out its execution in the presence of serious obstacles. It cannot combine its measures with secrecy, and it will not await their consequences with patience. These are qualities which more especially belong to an individual or to an aristocracy; and they are precisely the means by which an individual people attains to a predominant position.
If, on the contrary, we observe the natural defects of aristocracy, we shall find that their influence is comparatively innoxious in the direction of the external affairs of a State. The capital fault of which aristocratic bodies may be accused is that they are more apt to contrive their own advantage than that of the mass of the people. In foreign politics it is rare for the interest of the aristocracy to be in any way distinct from that of the people.
The propensity which democracies have to obey the impulse of passion rather than the suggestions of prudence, and to abandon a mature design for the gratification of a momentary caprice, was very clearly seen in America on the breaking out of the French Revolution. It was then as evident to the simplest capacity as it is at the present time that the interest of the Americans forbade them to take any part in the contest which was about to deluge Europe with blood, but which could by no means injure the welfare of their own country. Nevertheless the sympathies of the people declared themselves with so much violence in behalf of France that nothing but the inflexible character of Washington, and the immense popularity which he enjoyed, could have prevented the Americans from declaring war against England. And even then, the exertions which the austere reason of that great man made to repress the generous but imprudent passions of his fellow-citizens, very nearly deprived him of the sole recompense which he had ever claimed – that of his country’s love. The majority then reprobated the line of policy which he adopted, and which has since been unanimously approved by the nation. [15s] If the Constitution and the favor of the public had not entrusted the direction of the foreign affairs of the country to Washington, it is certain that the American nation would at that time have taken the very measures which it now condemns.
Almost all the nations which have ever exercised a powerful influence upon the destinies of the world by conceiving, following up, and executing vast designs – from the Romans to the English – have been governed by aristocratic institutions. Nor will this be a subject of wonder when we recollect that nothing in the world has so absolute a fixity of purpose as an aristocracy. The mass of the people may be led astray by ignorance or passion; the mind of a king may be biased, and his perseverance in his designs may be shaken – besides which a king is not immortal – but an aristocratic body is too numerous to be led astray by the blandishments of intrigue, and yet not numerous enough to yield readily to the intoxicating influence of unreflecting passion: it has the energy of a firm and enlightened individual, added to the power which it derives from perpetuity.
Saturday, February 8, 2020
THE AMERICAN DREAM KEYNES TRUMP THE MAVERICK AND US
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
RE NO CHRISTIE NO BARGAIN THOMAS FRIEDMAN NYT
Americans want a,
you guessed it,
Maverick Executive.
Unfortunately, it has always been an American dream.............
Friedman has nothing really new here, only seemingly so.
He says we should follow what the great majority of economists tell us, supposedly, ie I guess, his last paragraph, that we need 'growth' (where?), most economists say from Asia, not domestic economic growth. (Friedman by the way is a historian by background, or journalism, not an economist, and he takes other 'experts'' word for this.)
Most economists are globalists re where 'growth' happens, and they have, virtually all, supported free trade all along, as Krugman also relentlessly has.
Friedman has nothing really new here, only seemingly so.
He says we should follow what the great majority of economists tell us, supposedly, ie I guess, his last paragraph, that we need 'growth' (where?), most economists say from Asia, not domestic economic growth. (Friedman by the way is a historian by background, or journalism, not an economist, and he takes other 'experts'' word for this.)
Most economists are globalists re where 'growth' happens, and they have, virtually all, supported free trade all along, as Krugman also relentlessly has.
Term search: Maverick Executive, Krugman, Thomas Friedman, Keynes in the clouds.
At least Keynes had tried to argue primarily for a 'domestic economy solution', in the passage referred to:
Ch 24 IV The General Theory:
But if nations can learn to provide themselves with full employment by their domestic policy...there need be no important economic forces calculated to set the interest of one country against that of its neighbours. There would still be room for the international division of labour and for international lending in appropriate conditions. But there would no longer be a pressing motive why one country need force its wares on another or repulse the offerings of its neighbour...with the express object of upsetting the equilibrium of payments so as to develop a balance of trade in its own favour. International trade would cease to be what it is, namely, a desperate expedient to maintain employment at home by forcing sales on foreign markets and restricting purchases, which, if successful, will merely shift the problem of unemployment to the neighbor which is worsted in the struggle, but a willing and unimpeded exchange of goods and services in conditions of mutual advantage.
At least Keynes had tried to argue primarily for a 'domestic economy solution', in the passage referred to:
Ch 24 IV The General Theory:
But if nations can learn to provide themselves with full employment by their domestic policy...there need be no important economic forces calculated to set the interest of one country against that of its neighbours. There would still be room for the international division of labour and for international lending in appropriate conditions. But there would no longer be a pressing motive why one country need force its wares on another or repulse the offerings of its neighbour...with the express object of upsetting the equilibrium of payments so as to develop a balance of trade in its own favour. International trade would cease to be what it is, namely, a desperate expedient to maintain employment at home by forcing sales on foreign markets and restricting purchases, which, if successful, will merely shift the problem of unemployment to the neighbor which is worsted in the struggle, but a willing and unimpeded exchange of goods and services in conditions of mutual advantage.
BUTTIGIEG TARGETED BY RIVALS IS THE DIM EQUIVALENT TO CRUZ RUBIO TARGETED BY TRUMP AND HIS FIEND CHRISTIE
Buttigieg is a person of small experience, a political midget or pygmy, compared to the others......
He even seems shorter, even, than Warren! She is also more masculine..........
He is definitely being made to look even smaller than he is.
Thursday, March 3, 2016
Tuesday, November 13, 2018
REMEMBER THE CAMPAIGN TRUMP'S DEFORMED FIEND CHRISTIE PAINTED CRUZ RUBIO AS IGNORANT DWARVES
Wednesday, November 14, 2018
RE TRUMP CRUZ RUBIO CHRISTIE WAGNER
Re NYT Liberace: Rubio Trumpified
Cruz and Rubio, as I noted earlier in the post below, were painted by Trump's Fiend (Das Rheingold, just to turn this all inevitably in the direction either of Wagner or of Tarzan), as dwarves of color.
I want to elaborate on this just a little more, based on some past blasts.
If you really think about it, they qualify, frankly, as what one might call, and Gingrich would call, Sand Pygmy Cannibals: they are small, dark, and they eat their own kind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)