How Then Shall We Live?
June 30, 2010 
31 Comments
Those of you who are Facebook fans will find this thread on race quite intriguing. Several of the commenters are spot-on. We’re mystified by James McDonald’s belief that biblical genealogies are only relevant insofar as they document the lineage of Christ. The children of the patriarchs were made to memorize these extensive lists. This was considered their schooling. It was one of the most important things in their lives. We’re also mystified by his repetitive non sequiturs about everyone being required to return to their country of origin, if blood covenants exist. How does this follow? Just because technology and transportation have made the world a smaller place, and many people have mixed, doesn’t mean that nationality and homogeneity and politics are suddenly meaningless. The gospel only “eliminates the question of the alien” in a soteriological sense, not a national sense. Therefore, if national borders are meaningless, as McDonald implies, how can he say that he is opposed to illegal aliens? He is saying that there should be no national exclusivity that a multiple-choice quiz on American trivia cannot surmount. But he doesn’t treat his own family like this. Is his family portrait really open to any and all? If so, it is blatant hatred to accord his children as the equals of those who are outside the family. I’m very glad to see the property issue raised, because it tears the neo-Babelist argument about aliens apart. As stated, the key point is that unbiblical property laws cause us all to be aliens, not that alienhood is a temporary condition, like the flu, and that all Mexicans are really Americans in embryo.
A friend of ours sent in this excellent quote from a book written in 1906 by Fr. James L. Meagher, D.D. Keep in mind, as you read it, that this is what Christians used to believe, but you won’t find a Sunday school or seminary today that will teach it. In their arrogance, our contemporaries believe this fact to be an indictment of the past.
Rising from his sacrifice, Noe [Noah] blessed and cursed, as Christ was to rise from the tomb after his sacrifice and bless his followers with the gift of the Holy Ghost, while the curse of his blood rested on the Jewish nation.
“Cursed be Canaan, a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.” He could not curse Ham, for God had blessed the three sons and the curse rested on Canaan’s children. Ham’s sons settled Palestine, which they cursed with the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah. But Ham’s tribes settled Africa, and find their vocation as slaves and servants waiting on the white men. Cursed in the passion their father mocked in Noe, the African race love to serve as servants to the other races. Living since in deepest degradation, among them never rose religion, literature, invention, genius, or progress. The other races will not receive on an equality one in whose veins flows their tainted blood.
Prophetic words the Holy Ghost pronounced through Noe on the sons who covered him. “Blessed be the Lord God of Sem [Shem], let Canaan be his servant.” Thus he determined that the “Lord God,” Jesus Christ, would be born of Sem’s race, the Jews [Judeans]. Christ’s genealogy shows him as son of Sem. He is the glory of the Jewish Semites. The other Semitic nations settled Asia, where they have remained stagnant, conservative, unprogressive, hardly improving since the patriarchs, for they were not blessed with the grace of change.
To Japheth: “The enlarging” or “The white man,” Noe said, “May God enlarge Japheth, and may he dwell in the tents of Sem, and Canaan be his servant.” The Hebrew has here for “God” the word “Shekina,” the Holy Ghost, who spoke through Noe and gave Japheth’s sons, the white races, that colonizing instinct, civilization, progress, advancement, innovation, superiority—the unrest of bright minds which down the ages lifted them to the highest prosperity, culture and refinement. This is the reason the white men are so superior to the other races. God foresaw the Jews would reject Christ, that the white men would receive him, and thus he prepared them for their mission to receive the Gospel and carry on the Church.
This is precisely how history has unfolded, and though race-mixers hate it, they can’t deny it.
It can’t be stressed too often that the villains who call themselves “Jews” today are the very same people who are called “anti-Christs” in the Bible.
“The Jewish religion as it is today traces its descent, without a break, through all the centuries, from the Pharisees.” ~ Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. VIII, p. 474
Blood has particular relevance to how the events of the Incarnation era and subsequent history unfolded. You will recall that Esau “despised his birthright” and willfully sold it to Jacob. From Esau came the Edomites, and from Jacob came the Israelites. Edomites were called Idumæans by Romans and Greeks. According to Flavius Josephus (Antiquities, book 13, chapter 9), the Idumæans were forcibly converted to the Mosaic law by the Hasmonæan leader, John Hyrcanus. The most famous and bloodthirsty of all the Idumæans was Herod the Great, the military dictator who called himself King of Judea. His father had been installed as procurator by Julius Caesar. Herod purged the Levites from the temple, replacing them with his own sons, the Pharisees. These men usurped what remained of the Levitical priesthood after Herod murdered the chief priests. From the sect of Pharisaism came Talmudism and finally modern Judaism. According to Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls by J.H. Charlesworth (p. 239), “some twenty-eight high priests (only two of which were from families that had any legitimate claim) held office in little more than one century (from 37 BCE to 70 CE).”
As you can see, this casts much of what might be mistaken as small details in the New Testament in a new light. When Jesus is arrested and brought before the Sanhedrin, He is the blood heir of King David facing those who have no authority to put Him on trial. Even Roman law stripped them of the authority. Christ’s own disciples see the prophecy of Daniel’s 70th week unfolding before their eyes, yet the priestly imposters, who were denounced as vipers and hypocrites and whitewashed sepulchers by the Master, appear to be victorious. When they finally capture Jesus, which they had never been able to do, though they often tried, it shakes the disciples to the core. Even Peter denies knowing Him. When He is crucified and buried, the disciples go into hiding, afraid for their lives. Yet even then, much to the dismay of the Pharisees, the Romans hang a prophetic sign above His head: “King of the Judeans.” This was the same title that Herod had claimed for himself, just as Augustus, the son of Julius Caesar, claimed for himself the title “Son of God.” It was the census decreed by Augustus that was the reason for Jesus being born in Bethlehem, rather than Galilee, where his parents lived. This fulfilled the prophecy of Micah 5:2. As a child, Jesus avoids Herod’s holocaust in Bethlehem, where Jacob’s wife, Rachel, is buried. It is also the town where King David was born. Herod’s actions fulfill the prophecy of Jeremiah 31:15: “Rachel weeping for her children, refusing to be comforted, because they are no more.” The Pharisees see the sign that is nailed to the cross, and they know it’s true, but there is nothing they can do about it. The true-blood Son of the King is murdered by aliens, and then…the Miracle of the ages.
“Remember, O LORD, against the sons of Edom the day of Jerusalem, who said, ‘Raze it, raze it, to its very foundation!’” ~ Psalms 137:7
Anthony Bradley, the feted token Negro of Reformed Christianity, writes that hipster Christians who try to take their (white) vision of Christianity to urban minorities are little more than colonists. And as we all know from what we learned in school about Columbus, colonists be racists.
Worst of all, Bradley writes, the building of churches in inner cities has not procured racially mixed congregations, as originally designed. Instead, whites refuse to live like blacks, in squalor, and so they renovate, which drives out the blacks. This is called gentrification.
Hipster Christians talk about wanting to live among minorities but are gentrifying the neighborhoods in the process and really don’t care. Both groups mainly worship with other whites just like them. White “in-flight” is purging the city of minorities and driving the underclass to the suburbs. These white in-flight Christians often have paternalistic visions bringing redemption to the poor little brown natives who currently inhabit neighborhoods with houses needing renovation. And their inflated hipster egos portray the city as a place that needs them desperately.
Doesn’t your heart bleed for the “poor little brown natives” who are forced into the suburbs because white people plant trees in what used to be a garbage pile? There goes the neighborhood. Whites are called racists if they don’t help and colonists if they do.
The article is followed by this funny comment: “I thought stereotyping was a bad thing.” This person obviously does not understand the definition of the word “racist.” Another writes: “I’m not sure why World has your drivel on this site… No matter what whitey does to benefit minorities, you would call it paternalistic and colonialistic.” What do you think they’re paying him for, Sherlock?
We have our disagreements with Steven Wedgeworth, but this paper, in which he exposes the flaws in “two kingdoms” theology, popularized by Michael Horton and some others, is exceptional. The idea behind 2K is that God rules over church and state in different ways and to different ends, and that Christ is the redeemer of the church and is the creator and sustainer of the state and civil realm. But for Calvin and Luther and the Reformers, “the two kingdoms were not approximations of the visible institutions of Church and State, but rather that of heaven and earth or spirit and body. The spiritual kingdom was eternal and immediate, whereas the civic kingdom was temporal and always mediated, by princes or by clergy and all other men in vocations.” Thus, both the state and visible church exist in the temporal realm, and it makes no sense to say that the “two kingdoms have significantly different ends, functions, and modes of operation,” as David VanDrunen claims. As Wedgeworth writes, “The individual Christian always finds himself living in both kingdoms at the same time.” And here’s another good point: “As distasteful as it may be for moderns of all stripes, it remains true that apart from kings with religious convictions, there simply would not have been a Reformation.” This is why Calvin calls princes “vicars of God.” If this sounds like a marriage of church and state to you, it should.
The eternal and temporal kingdoms relate to one another as the soul relates to the body. A proper view of the two kingdoms legitimizes the union of church and state, as was true in medieval times, and even in our own American history. Therefore, a Christian is not to “live as a divided self, holding one notion of ‘creation’ ethics and another notion of ‘redemption’ ethics.” The faith is for all of life, and God’s law applies to all. Wedgeworth brilliantly observes that Francis Schaeffer’s critique of modern culture was not merely “that it was insufficiently Christian or churchly. He actually claimed that it was insufficiently human. His vision of a redeemed culture was a culture that existed as it was originally designed to exist… We could say that it was a vision of natural culture.”
Likewise, at the heart of Kinism is the appreciation for how God designed men, nations, and races to live. We know that we can’t really claim to be Christians if we cease to be human. We are not ghosts; we are of flesh and blood, created for divine purpose, and we trust to be made whole in the resurrection. To work against God’s purpose in the world is sin.
In Italy, female employment in the government sector is 54%. It’s 64% in Ireland, 60% in Australia, and 64% in Germany. Meanwhile, taxing and spending has taxed us and spent us, and everyone is now realizing (too late) that Keynesianism is a lie. With austerity programs beginning to be enforced throughout the West, Laura Wood asks, “Can we afford to keep employing women?” In lean economic times, the non-essential jobs are first to go. As we “sexists” have long observed, the average woman does not have the strength or the aggression to do the most essential jobs (her essential role is in the home). Men construct the buildings where women can work in air-conditioned comfort. Laura’s husband jokes that if there were any female plumbers, he would have married one.
Almost all businesses used to be “sexist.” They commonly hired single women, but once those women were married, it was commonly recognized that they were called to a higher duty. The tide began to turn, as is true with a large number of other social pathologies, in the 1950s. Here’s a 1951 letter from IBM announcing the change in corporate policy. Just as women in combat have eased the necessity for a draft by placing less demand on men, married women in the workforce have halved the salaries of men, so that two incomes are now needed to cover expenses that used to be met with one. Children have suffered as a result. They are now raised by the state instead of their mothers. It is quite possible that feminism has decimated our race even more than wars for Jews.
“We’ve been much too nice,” says Gloria Jew Steinem.
Laura Wood also has a fascinating post on maternal lust. Few want to discuss this, but maternal desire can be perverted.
A woman who wants a child no matter what – even if that child will never know his father and even if she is not married – takes maternal desire to an unreasonable and immoral extreme. She may be a nurturing mother for the children she bears. She may sacrifice herself for years to raise them well and her children may praise her for giving them life, but all that cannot hide her selfishness and maternal lust.
I believe this is also true of Christian women who, with the best of intentions, adopt racial strangers. They are told by pulpit pirates that this is what God wants, and they apply their maternal instincts in a perverted fashion, refusing to countenance the possibility that selfishness is at the root of it.
Skin cancer is on the rise for self-loathing white women.
Breastfeeding is “creepy,” says a parenting magazine. Just recently, a woman was kicked out of a Colorado Rockies game for breastfeeding her baby. Meanwhile, Jew-TV can’t show enough skin.
Just as sexual porn is a vice for men, emotional porn (Sex and the City, Twilight) is a vice for women.
Here’s a lovely Irish woman who leaves Christianity and becomes a unitarian because she can’t deal with the fact that God is not her equal. As she puts it, she doesn’t understand how God can be three persons and yet One. To make herself feel better and more intelligent, she joins a large body of heretics who are comforted by performing rituals for a “god” who is easy to understand.
Just after John Calvin denounces the error that Christ, in forgiving the harlot of her sins, intended for there to be no capital punishment for harlotry, he writes these very interesting words that also pertain to race-mixing:
Besides, the adulteress, when she bears an unlawful child, not only robs the name of the family, but violently takes away the right of inheritance from the lawful offspring, and conveys it to strangers… [L]et us remember that, while Christ forgives the sins of men, he does not overturn political order…
When John Milton said, “New presbyter is but old priest writ large,” he intended it to be a rebuke of the Scottish Presbyterians who came very close to ending prelacy in Britain. But as a friend of ours reminds us, the same could be said of race and family. Race is just family writ large. The man who claims to love his family but hates his race or is indifferent to it is a liar, just as the man who says he loves God but hates his brother is a liar (1 John 4:20).
“I wished I completely belonged somewhere,” says Obama’s sister, reflecting on the mixed-race, borderless, and kinless existence that was the legacy of the deranged white slut from Kansas whom she and Barack called their “mother.” Judeochristians are now giving their “adoptees” the same rich experience, all in the name of the gospel, of course.
“Of Whites marrying outside their race in 2008, nearly half—49 percent—married a Hispanic, 18 percent married an Asian, 14 percent married an African-American, and the remainder married someone from another group.” Even for adulterers, Negroes are the least desirable. It’s kind of amazing that articles are appearing in major newspapers about “fat, angry, loud, domineering” black women who say they are driven to such extremes from dealing with black men who are beneath them in every way. Much (but certainly not all) of this is caused by integration and the attendant expectation that black men will turn white by being in proximity with whites. It is not difficult to understand why any man who is expected to do the unnatural would respond to the pressure with violence. To be the master of a little domain is the essence of manhood.
“Evangelicals are finally starting to wake up and smell the coffee. Unfortunately, it’s about 30 years after the coffee maker shorted out and burned the house down.” (James is an excellent writer.) All of a sudden, sexual immorality is important to them.
“Jerry Falwell was proud to have a non-white heading up his university (even if he is very light skinned), and thousands of future preachers wanted to attend a school headed by a non-white to prove how much they love Jesus.” Until the news came out that the man is a liar. Still, being a liar is not enough to outweigh the diversity points, so he gets to keep his job and blame the whole affair on Calvinists. Back in the 1960s, Falwell was a strong advocate for giving white Christian children a white Christian education. Then he realized that he loved money even more.
The evangelical race-mixing nuts who grabbed their L.L. Bean safari outfits and fedora hats, and rushed off to Haiti after the big earthquake, because Negroes were in dire need of adoption by competitive, middle-aged, menopausal, white American women, couldn’t look more ridiculous today. In less than two years, the population of Haiti will be more than restored. Those kids must be eating something. Hey, here’s an idea: We could all stop having children and allow Haiti to supply us with young prodigies henceforth. This will give Christians a bountiful supply of props on which to demonstrate their superiority. Where would Christians be without their props? They would be like Gallagher or Carrot Top when the luggage is lost.
A hospital medicine cabinet in Haiti. With organizational skills like these, would you trust a Haitian doctor to even know how to prescribe lethal medicine?
Diversities “face foreclosure” and are “disproportionately affected” by foreclosure and are “hit harder” by foreclosure. The Jew-headlines never tell the truth, which is that diversities are more likely to default on their contracts. Instead, whites are blamed for discriminatory lending practices and, of course, racism. “Since there was broad agreement that minorities should borrow more, nobody is in any hurry to revisit this bipartisan blunder.”
Naturally, “minority-owned” banks are exempt from reform laws. At what point will whites, who have long been a minority in the world and will soon be a minority in America, get to take advantage of minority quotas? Or when the day soon arrives when we are officially marginalized, will we be living in white shantytowns like these Afrikaners? You see, apartheid never actually ends; it just changes hands.
Slavery lives on in the Congo. But you know what’s really evil? Those white people in South Africa and Rhodesia who built separate schools, homes, and post offices for blacks. White people are racists.
Here’s a picture of the “RapeAxe” (female condom) being sold in South Africa. The teeth on the sides embed themselves in the African Family Values.
Ah, the smell of tires burning at eventide. The mobs gathering to drag crackers from their cars and beat them to death. It must be Juneteenth! It’s always nice to see black people celebrating traditional holidays. It just feels like a Norman Rockwell painting. On Father’s Day this year, black men dominated the advertisements. And why not? Every time Father’s Day rolls around, they rush out to get someone pregnant. They must love children.
“It is a mistake to assume blacks riot because they have some legitimate grievance. Blacks are likely to riot whenever there is a large number of them together in one place. A rap concert or a basketball game is as good an excuse for a riot as ‘racial profiling and police brutality.’” ~ Jared Taylor
More bad news for the colorblind. First, recall that everyone, including the Supreme Court, knows that white children do better in white schools. But schools were forcibly integrated based on the religious belief that it would be better for non-whites, and a sacrifice that whites would have to make. Now a Dutch sociology professor has verified what other studies have shown, that non-whites do better in segregated schools. His research shows that students’ grades are inversely proportional to ethnic diversity. Any “racist” could have told you this, but sociology degrees are apparently impressive.
Illiterate blacks and the jobs they deserve. But as you know, no one in “education” is allowed to keep his job if he questions the religion of Equality.
What America is all about: “A former crack dealer and criminal speaks to the soul of the young Southern girl, giving her the courage to pursue her dreams.”
If black women die young, white “racism” must be to blame.
Blacks are upset that Cleopatra is not played in movies by a black woman (Angelina Jolie is the latest to take the role). It is obvious from her eyes, nose, and mouth that Cleopatra was white, but these days, African = black.
Remember the Black Panthers who were blocking access to polling places a couple of years ago? A DOJ attorney has resigned over Obama’s unwillingness to prosecute the bruthas. Whites and non-whites have fundamentally different views of the role of government.
Righteous Black Rage is the defense in this sickening rape trial from France. It takes a strong stomach to listen to the testimony, but it’s important to know what kind of world our people have created for our own daughters. It does no good to get angry at savages for behaving like savages. The problem is with the popular religion of Equality and the white people who bow at the altar. One commenter states it well: “We are dishonored, and dishonorable.” May God have mercy and bring us to repentance, and may the day soon come when these horrors are no more than bad memories.
In off-white Chicago, 54 people have been shot dead in just three days. How can this be? Isn’t there a handgun ban in Chicago? Liberals are flummoxed as to why criminals don’t obey the law. In Chicago schools, which are 91% off-white, and where only 3% of off-whites go on to earn a bachelor degree, so-called “students” receive $11,500 per year for their mockery of an education. (It would be racist to expel them as being unfit.) Now 1,500 of the most violent “students” will receive an additional $6,667 each from white taxes to convince them to stop acting like savages.
The Supreme Court’s gun decision is of very good effect, but it is unfortunately based on the illegal “constitutional Amendments adopted in the aftermath of the Civil War,” as Justice Samuel Alito put it. In other words, it is based on “settled law” rather than the intent of those who wrote the Bill of Rights. I think Alexander H. Stevens, the Vice President of the Confederacy, said it best: “One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises.”
Tom Emmer, the Republican candidate for governor in Minnesota, has an excellent idea: he wants to defend the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution by ensuring that federal laws only apply in Minnesota if they are validated by super-majorities of the state legislature.
For Supreme Court nominee Jew Kagan, the NRA is like the KKK. And here’s a good Ann Coulter column about how, for Kagan’s liberal Manhattan family, “nothing was sacrosanct.”
When liberals say “nothing is sacrosanct,” they mean “nothing other Americans consider sacrosanct is sacrosanct.” They demonstrate their open-mindedness by ridiculing other people’s dogma, but will not brook the most trifling criticism of their own dogmas.
Sounds like some Christians I’ve met.
“An overweight Jewish lesbian, whose career seems to have been put on fast track by her political supporters both inside and outside the media and someone who if she held diametrically opposed views, would not even be considered for a grounds crew post at Harvard, she is the quintessential symbol of Obama’s America.” ~ Jew Paul Gottfried
According to Jews, Jewish terrorism is “romantic” and Jewish terrorists are “freedom fighters.” Aren’t words remarkably plastic little things? I wonder if Jews would equate Irgun to the NRA and KKK.
“Any other government that murdered thousands of civilians in other countries, as Israel does routinely in Lebanon, Gaza, and the West Bank, would have its entire government and military on trial before the War Crimes Tribunal at the Hague… Every time the rest of the world tries to hold the Israeli government accountable for its crimes, the US vetoes the UN resolution.” ~ Paul Craig Roberts
Jews reveal their plans for the world. Don’t say you haven’t been warned.
Paul McCartney equates global warming deniers with Holocaust deniers. Maybe there’s something to that.
Jew Noah Feldman, writing in the Jew York Times about Jew Elena Kagan, calls it a “cause for celebration” that whites no longer care about religious faith and ethnic homogeneity.
Unlike almost every other dominant ethnic, racial or religious group in world history, white Protestants have ceded their socioeconomic power by hewing voluntarily to the values of merit and inclusion, values now shared broadly by Americans of different backgrounds. The decline of the Protestant elite is actually its greatest triumph.
Of course the same Jews who celebrate WASP colorblindness and encourage WASP racial masochism are the same ones who push the hardest for “inclusiveness” and “diversity” in every institution. The Supreme Court needs a lesbian because she is a lesbian; a Hispanic because she is Hispanic; a negro because he is a negro; a woman because she is a woman, etc.
Strangely, Jews never write about how it would be a “cause for celebration” if Israel stopped outlawing Jewish-Arab marriages, elected a Palestinian Prime Minister, balanced ethnic and religious control of the Knesset, and encouraged non-Jewish immigration. Oh, right, this is necessary to prevent the rise of another Hitler. Well then, I retract my anti-Semitic musings.
The Judeo-Marxists in control of Britain are now trying to imprison Nick Griffin for not updating the BNP website fast enough with a link to the new mandated constitution that admits non-whites to the party. Jews will never rest until similar laws are enforced in America.
Every real nation is a country of common blood, as Thomas Jefferson said. The only “nations” that are defined by creeds are totalitarian.
“Americanism,” as explained by a Jew. The primary goal of “Americanism” is war for Israel. This is usually described as “defending freedom” against “the ascendance of evil.” One of the primary assumptions of “Americanism” is that the all-purpose, self-rising “values” of the founding fathers (now called “founders” out of respect for feminists) is always more important than the blood of the founding fathers. Hence, while “Americanism” can fit any mold for any and all people, its objective never changes.
It’s remarkable that Igor Stravinsky was arrested in 1940 for tampering with the Star-Spangled Banner (he re-orchestrated the “public property” for the Boston Symphony), but Americanists and “loose constructionists” are free to tamper at will with what was in the minds of our “racist,” Christian forefathers.
Despite supposedly not existing or being merely a social construct, race is of utmost importance to the government. What else do you know that is so important to those who believe it doesn’t exist? The options of “unknown,” “multiracial,” or “declined to answer” have been excised from school questionnaires. But remember, you’re a racist if you disagree with conventional wisdom about race. You’re free to think about it and talk about it, as long as you agree with liberals. Otherwise, you should lose your job.
“When Solzhenitsyn came to the West in the 1970’s he stated that the most striking thing about the European people was their lack of courage. And of course Solzhenitsyn was not saying that there were not any Europeans left who would rush into a burning building to save a child or face a firing squad without flinching; he was talking about the courage to defend one’s people against an implacable enemy. In order to have the latter type of courage a people have to be a people. They must feel bound to their people by ties of faith and race. The problem with the Europeans is that they don’t believe they are a people and they do not have faith.”
“Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.” ~ G.K. Chesterton
This writer is chagrined to discover that “racists” are always right.
This is a jaw-dropping statistic: If present trends continue, 82% of population growth through 2050 will be from immigrants who arrived here since 2005, and their descendants.
Mint.com links to VDare in an article about the high costs of immigration, and then the editor puts up a special page to apologize for the racism of referring to facts. (Facts are anti-Semitic, too.)
An endangered species on its way to oblivion, but this particular species gets no sympathy from liberal tree-huggers.
“The world is indeed full of peril, and in it there are many dark places; but still there is much that is fair, and though in all lands love is now mingled with grief, it grows perhaps the greater.” ~ The Fellowship of the Ring
Every race except Non-Hispanic Whites will make a state’s abortion rate go up. Jews are the biggest promoters of (non-Jewish) murder.
Hispanic geography, brought to you by the Woman of the Year.
“I thought the wailings we heard at night were the coyotes barking at the moon. I didn’t know until later that these sounds were the cries of women being raped in the Mexican desert, some less than a hundred yards away from the border.”
“If this doesn’t stop soon,” Goldstein said, “we’ll have to find a solution for the black swans in order to restore tranquility to their lives. In the meantime we are trying all sorts of intermediary solutions to open the water channels to them. It’s funny to say, but the caretakers are using peace activists to deal with this.”
Indians have a better sense of humor than negrified, judaicized, hyper-sensitive Americans.
I wonder how long it will be before this website is denounced as racist.
The NBA, which is 80% black in a country that is 13% black, gets an A for “diversity.” Read about the unbearable whiteness of soccer. The top five players in the world are white. Therefore, 80% black is “diverse” but 80% white is not diverse.
Look at these stunning pictures of the Gulf oil spill.
Far worse than Watergate.
John Marshall is organizing some Kinist meet-and-greets.
Wow! Have you visited Instauration Online lately? Twenty-one of the twenty-five volumes are now scanned, and soon the collection will be complete. Wilmot Robertson would be proud to see his hard work kept alive. Thank goodness for Al Gore, toiling late into the night in his laboratory with his masseuse, to bring us this wonderful Internet thing. Like Edison, he must have burned the midnight oil. Or was it motion lotion?
It was very kind of James Edwards to call our review of his new book the best 30th birthday present he could have imagined. Thirtieth birthday! That makes me feel old. I’m somewhat embarrassed to say that I was one of the dittoheads who rushed out to buy Rush Limbaugh’s book, The Way Things Ought to Be, in 1992. That was before James was shaving. It made the career of publisher Judith Regan and it launched Limbaugh’s TV show, which was produced by Roger Ailes, who is now the head honcho at Fox. Limbaugh’s broadcasting skills are considerable, but I can tell you for a fact that Racism, Schmacism is of greater substance, better-written, and simply right. James doesn’t have a media empire backing him, but don’t let that fool you into thinking that he has not written a superior book. There I go again, using the word “superior.” I need to be careful or someone will accuse me of being a supremacist.
“When Jesus is arrested and brought before the Sanhedrin, He is the blood heir of King David facing those who have no authority to put Him on trial. Even Roman law stripped them of the authority. ”
BINGO!
When I read Robinson’s ‘Redating the N.T.’ and other books in one class in Seminary, I realized that if St. John was the son of a priestly family, his entire corpus of writing in the N.T. was targeted against the Idumean usurpers of the high priestly line; and St. John’s Gospel, as well as his Epistles, merely were corroborating the priestly line of Aaron in Christ, for it was this genetic descendancy alone, that had been given the charge to maintain the priesthood in racial purity.
This then makes the object of the Letter to the Hebrews also make explicit sense; not in that the priesthood was abolished,(for ‘Christ EVER LIVETH,’ etc.) but that it was TRANSFERRED in the New Covenant, the ‘transfer of conditional privilege’ [Provan's 'The Church is Israel now] from those ‘who say they are Jews and are not’ [Rev. 2:8,9] to them [us] ‘who have an altar whereof they have no right to eat, which serve the tabernacle…’. [Heb. 13:10]. One needs to note that it is not a ‘spiritual’ priesthood, but an actual, efficacious priesthood, in that the recipients continually do EAT- therefore, the construct of priesthood that makes Eucharist, ‘Take, EAT, This is my body, etc.’ is not only necessary in the New Covenant age, it is mandated by the entire Bible itself.
Congrats, SWB. You’re getting it!
“Herod purged the Levites from the temple, replacing them with his own sons, the Pharisees. These men usurped what remained of the Levitical priesthood after Herod murdered the chief priests.”
I hate to ruin a good story with boring facts, but where’s the proof that the Pharisees were “sons of Herod”?
Nope, the Pharisees had already existed some time before the days of Herod the Great, quietly increasing their number of man-made traditions.
It has been speculated that they were descended from militant Jewish elements of the Maccabean era – the time of rebellion against pagan Greek rulers.
Herod was just a cheap cynical scoundrel, while the Pharisees (or at least many of them) were sincerely grim fanatics.
The writer didn’t mean to imply that all Pharisees were the sons and supporters of Herod.
It’s true that the reality of the situation is more complex. History records nothing of Pharisees and Sadducees prior to the reign of John Hyrcanus. This fact alone alludes to the Edomite infiltration and the taking of sides between natives and foreigners in what were essentially political parties.
“John Hyrcanus conquered the whole of Edom and undertook the forced conversion of its inhabitants to Judaism (Joseph., Ant. XIII, 9, 1). Thenceforth the Edomites became a section of the Jewish people.” ~ Encyclopedia Judaica, Vol. 6, (1971), p. 378; The New Standard Jewish Encyclopedia (1977), p. 589
Hyrcanus was originally a Pharisee. Then the Pharisees lost political power because they did not support Hellenism as the Sadducees did. By the time of Herod, the Pharisees who opposed the Edomite infiltration (just as patriotic Americans today oppose the Jewish infiltration of our institutions) were punished, and Herod’s kin and supporters were rewarded. This left the Pharisees as being conservative in name only. From then on, they were compromised.
It’s really very much like Republicans and Democrats, and how Republicans, in the imagination of most (deluded) Christians, represent that which is biblical. Then imagine if Christ had come in the present time. He would have ripped into the Republicans for being hypocrites, because what is thought to be traditional American conservatism is really just a transfer system for Jews. In fact, Herod very likely saw the value in having two major parties (powerless though they were) to represent the people, because he knew that they were his puppets. Similarly, voters in our time get upset with one party, elect the other, and in the next cycle it swings to the other side. They think the election means something, but TPTB have already bought off both sides.
To make matters even more complex, we know that Christ said the Pharisees sat in the seat of Moses; therefore, they had legitimate authority. Paul said he was a Pharisee concerning the law (i.e., not a hypocrite, and a patriot to his kinsmen).
Another interesting thing to note is the behavior of the Edomite Jews when Titus besieged Jerusalem in 70 AD (the prophesied end of the old order). Christians who recalled the words of Christ fled the city when they saw that armies encircled it. Meanwhile, the Edomites took the opportunity to rob, rape, and massacre the inhabitants, like it was a black riot in Detroit. They might have killed more of “their own people” than the Romans did. Josephus writes about this in “Wars of the Jews,” books 4-5.
Therefore, faithful Judeans were rescued from judgment and were dispersed, carrying with them the standard of the Levites, so to speak. The Edomites who were not killed by the Romans were also dispersed, and in Babylon they wrote their sacred book of dogshit called the Talmud. Thus, in the present time we have anti-Christs who call themselves Jews but who have no relation, physical or spiritual, to the ancient Hebrews.
Who is the author here? And what is your church affiliation?
Are you aware of how what you are communicating is hurtful/harmful to many people?
Chris Lemmon
St. Louis MO
Would the names of the authors and their church membership really matter? This isn’t Facebook, friend. The truth or falsehood of what is written here stands or falls on its own. Challenge it if you disagree.
As for your final question, not a day goes by when I do not ask it of race-mixing Christians. As Sam Dickson says, they are sociopaths because they rebel against that which establishes community and civilization. The word “sociopath” literally means “suffering society.”
Your name does matter. If you actually want to backup what you say, you would say it publicly where what you say could be scrutinized by by your peers and other Christians.
It is cowardly to wear a mask. Of course other racists have done this in the past while intimidating and terrorizing African Americans. They called themselves the KKK.
But again. You are a coward for hiding your identity and making such statements.
That allows you to keep some level of public dignity while masking your truly hateful beliefs and pretending to be a ‘Christian.’ I would not engage you in an intellectual discussion unless you revealed your actual name. You are not taking yourself or anyone else serious until you do that.
Thanks for playing along.
Chris Lemmon,
This site has been hacked and shut down repeatedly in the past, and the people who run it have been repeatedly harrassed and threatened, and they have their families to think about. Of course, this is all coming from peaceful, pure, loving, anti-racists, who’ve shown themselves to be the real haters. So, I don’t blame admin for wearing a ‘mask’.
Go find out if what admin is saying is TRUE, and then come back and we’ll talk. You’re supposed to be a christian; stop whining about hurt feelings and do your own thinking and researching. The truth matters, even if it hurts in the short term. Go ahead, be a berean, I dare you.
Chris proves your point well, Randall. Without showing that anything he read here is false, he proceeds to call us “cowards” (until we invite him over for a beer), and then implies that our “truly hateful” and “racist” beliefs will result in the “intimidation and terrorism” of “African Americans.” This is clearly hate speech that is designed to silence dissent, and when it has the effect of coaxing some to violence, as it often does, the Chris Lemmons of the world are never called to account for their slander. Thus, with nothing to lose, they feel quite comfortable in boasting of their “courage” and “dignity.” It is equally clear that those who violate God’s law by bearing false witness against their brothers, as Chris has done, cannot be trusted to be responsible stewards of the personal information they seek.
The simple fact of the matter is that there is a long history of anonymity in polemics. The church fathers and founding fathers used it to great effect. Though SWB is not of a personal nature, those who wish to dispute the facts presented here are welcome to do so. No one who posts comments here is required to divulge anything more about himself than he wishes, and never, in the history of SWB, has information collected on readers been used for unethical purposes. I wish I could say that the opposite is true.
To see the effect that race-mixing has on the Christian brain, read this post from Andrew Sandlin, who once edited Rushdoony’s newsletter:
http://web.me.com/pandrewsandlin/New_CCL_2/Blog/Entries/2010/7/2_American_Exceptionalism_Is_Christian_Exceptionalism.html
First, some background. In 2004, Sandlin agreed with Jew Allan Bloom “that the United States was the first nation in the history of the world of which one could be a part simply by adhering to a set of ideas – skin color and accent and ethnicity are irrelevant… Our culture, therefore, is not so much socially homogeneous as it is ideationally homogeneous.” Stunning, isn’t it, that a Jew could say such a thing?
Sandlin has also said: “Blood and soil mean much less here than ideas. Not race or place, but ideas, have always been at the root of what it means to be an American.”
In the article at hand, he continues to equate the proper understanding of patriotism (the root of which is patria, which means father, not ideology) with Nazism. His ideological “patriotism” is based on “individual liberty, religious liberty, separation of powers, protection of minorities, and support of free markets… A Christian patriot, therefore, is one who loves and respects his country in its structure and institutions, and in its history, to the extent that its peoples have adhered to and honored its basic Christian premises.” Just in case you fail to get the point, he clearly states that “the object of valid patriotism is not our sinful people, but our Christian principles.” He throws the word “sinful” into the mix, but it’s really meaningless, because never has a people existed that is not sinful. Read it as: Patriotism, despite what the dictionary says, has nothing to do with our people.
The trouble for “American exceptionalists” and “Christian libertarians” like Andrew Sandlin and Greg Bahnsen’s son David is that, while men have always taken up arms to fight and die in the defense of wife, children, clan, and kin, no one has ever sacrificed his life for the defense of abstract liberty, detached from its object. No one has ever fought and died for equality, policy, or even the ideal of justice. And the “free markets”? Don’t make me laugh. Just how long can neo-patriotism last then?
Amazingly, Sandlin declares that “resistance to patriotism of the sort I have articulated is resistance to Christianity…”
This is where he illustrates the point I tried to make to our Grievously Concerned friend, Chris. Christians have become sociopaths when they willfully rebel against the age-old manner in which communities are established and maintained, and civilization, by extension.
So your advocating segregation based on skin color? Apartheid style race dividing?
Let me just try to understand where you are coming from….
Your suggesting that if I associate with or have friends of another race/skin color, that behavior in and of itself is sinful?
Chris, I hope you’re not in law enforcement, because you’re shooting first and interrogating second. You should try to understand where someone is “coming from” before you engage in hate speech. But if you really want to know, take the time to do some reading. If you can’t take the time to do that, a sound bite isn’t going to help you.
I for one am very blessed by the ministry of this web-blog.
If our people have a lesson to learn…this is the place to learn it.
Chris,
You might consider doing some viewing as well. Go rent ‘Rabbit Proof Fence’ at your local video store. Or, better yet, view Craig Bodecker’s ‘Conversation on Race’. I believe it’s available on-line.
The views expressed here are not something you’re going to ‘get’ over-night, through asking politically correct, loaded questions akin to: ‘have you stopped beating your wife?’. Please, do some research, consider ALL the ways liberalism, egalitarianism and multi-cultural blather have infiltrated and co-opted the church, and then come back and ask your questions.
“First, some background. In 2004, Sandlin agreed with Jew Allan Bloom “that the United States was the first nation in the history of the world of which one could be a part simply by adhering to a set of ideas – skin color and accent and ethnicity are irrelevant”
That statement is actually incorrect. The first major example of “proposition nation” in history was not the United States but the pagan Roman Empire.
In the 2nd century AD, Greek rhetorician Aelius Aristides from Asia Minor thus praised Roman meritocratic universalism in his panegyric:
http://loudoun.nvcc.edu/home/docampbell/Hist101/Documents/AeliusAristides.html
“. . .No part of the earth escapes your rule, unless you have rejected it as useless . . . . And extensive and sizable as the empire is, perfect governing does much more than mere territorial boundaries to make it great. . . .The world is now like a well-swept and fenced-in front yard. The world speaks in unison, like a chorus; and so well does it harmonize under its chorus master that it joins in praying that this empire may last for all time.
. . . Like one continuous country and one race, all the world quietly obeys. Everything is carried out by command or nod, and it is simpler than plucking the string of a lyre. If a need arises, the thing has only to be decided upon, and it is done.
. . . Most noteworthy and most praiseworthy of all is the grandeur of your conception of citizenship. There is nothing on earth like it. You have divided all of the people of the empire—and when I say that, I mean the whole world—into two classes; and all the more cultured, virtuous, and able ones everywhere you have made into citizens and nationals of Rome . . .Neither the sea nor any distance on land shuts a man out from citizenship. Asia and Europe are in this respect not separate. Everything lies open to everybody; and no one fit for office or responsibility is considered an alien. Rome has never said “No more room!”
. . . No envy afflicts the empire. You have set an example, throwing open all doors and enabling qualified men to play a ruler’s part no less than a subject’s. No hatred creeps in either, from those who fail to qualify. Since the state is universal and like one city, magistrates naturally treat the governed not as aliens but as their own . . . . So of course things as they are satisfy and benefit both poor and rich! . . .
Under you what was formerly thought incapable of conjunction has in fact become united—an empire at once strong and humane, mild rule without oppression . . . So all people are now happier to send in their taxes to you than anyone would be to collect them for himself from others . . . . Everyone clings tight to you, and would no sooner see fit to break away than passengers on a ship would from their pilot.”
In 212 AD, emperor Caracalla finally declared all freemen of the empire – from Britain to Arabia – as Roman citizens:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutio_Antoniniana
“According to Cassius Dio, the only Roman historian to talk about this edict, and with only one sentence, the reasons Caracalla passed this law were mainly to increase the number of people available to tax. In the words of Cassius Dio : “This was the reason why he made all the people in his empire Roman citizens; nominally he was honouring them, but his real purpose was to increase his revenues by this means, inasmuch as aliens did not have to pay most of these taxes.”[1]“
Here is more of Aristides’ sycophantic praise of the Roman empire – you will see how New World Order ideology has deep roots (extending all the way to Babel, of course):
http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~fisher/hst205/readings/RomanOration.html
“You have divided into two parts all men throughout your empire… everywhere giving citizenship to all those who are more accomplished, noble, and powerful, even as they retain their native-born identities, [Aristides, for example, retained his citizenship in the Anatolian city of Smyrna while simultaneously possessing Roman citizenship] while the rest you have made subjects and the governed. Neither the sea nor the great expanse of intervening land keeps one from being a citizen, and there is no distinction between Europe and Asia…. No one is a foreigner who deserves to hold an office or is worthy of trust. Rather, there is here a common “world democracy” under the rule of one man, the best ruler and director …. You have divided humanity into Romans and non-Romans, … and because you have divided people in this manner, in every city throughout the empire there are many who share citizenship with you, no less than the share citizenship with their fellow natives. And some of these Roman citizens have not even seen this city [Rome]! There is no need for troops to garrison the strategic high opints of these cities, because the most important and powerful people in each region guard their native lands for you…. Yet there is not a residue of resentment among those excluded [from Roman citizenship and a share in the governance of the provinces]. Because your government is both universal and like that of a single city-state, its governors rightly rule not as foreigners but, as it were, their own people….Additionally, all of the masses of subjects under this government have protection against the more powerful of their native countrymen, by virtue of your anger and vengeance, which would fall upon the more powerful wihtout delay should they dare to break the law. Thus, the present government serves rich and poor alike, and your constitution has developed a single, harmonious, all-embracing union. What in former days seemed impossible has in your time come to pass: You control a vast empire with a rule that is firm but not unkind….
As on a holiday, the entire civilized world lays down the weapons that were its ancient burden and has turned to adornment and all glad thoughts, with the power to realize them…. Cities glisten with radiance and charm, and the entire earth has been made beautiful like a garden…. Like a perpetual sacred flame, the celebration is unending…. You, better than anyone else, have proved the truth of the proverb: The earth is everyone’s mother and our common fatherland. It is now possible for Hellene and non-Hellene [by this time the term Hellene did not refer simply to an ethnic Greek. It meant anyone who was a Roman citizen and who shared in the Greco-Roman high culture of the empire. Thus, Aristides, a native of Asia Minor, was a Hellene. A non-Hellene, or barbarian, was either someone from outside the empire or one of the empire's uneducated masses], with or without property, to travel with ease wherever he wishes, as though passing from homeland to homeland…. As far as security is concerned, it suffices to be a Roman citizen, or rather one of those people united under your rule….
“
Petr, that is absolutely fascinating. The most important part of it is that in a very short time after these boastful words were written, the empire fell, and everything that the ancient Romans worked for centuries to build was swept away. The West doesn’t seem to realize that Rome’s grand experiment in propositional nationhood was a colossal failure.
How ironic that neo-Babelists like Andrew Sandlin have burned so many calories against Rome theologically while being thoroughly Roman nationally.
Fascinating. One can also see the ‘universal jurisdiction’ mentality of post-schism Roman Catholi-schism in this mindset. That it did not take place in Rome/Christianity until after the breach with Constantinople, is telling.
One other observation, just to throw a monkey-wrench into the works. St. Paul used his Roman Citizenship much as the selection from Aristides’ notes. So, clearly, there is a biblical involvement in the multicultural state. But what is it’s involvement, extent, and purpose thereby?
“Rather, there is here a common “world democracy” under the rule of one man, the best ruler and director”
This comment here may perplex a lay-reader of history. But actually according to many experts, the fall of Roman republic and the rise of the empire could be seen from one perspective as the TRIUMPH of democracy instead of its downfall.
For the traditional Roman republic was an aristocratic oligarchy. The common masses often supported some aspirant for absolute power as the man who would crush or at least humiliate the hated Senate patricians.
(Likewise, Russian peasants sang the praises of Ivan the Terrible, despotic Czar that destroyed the power of high nobility in Russia.)
And indeed, Caesar and his follower Octavian Augustus were supported by the bread-and-circuses crowd as they abolished the aristocratic republic (de facto if not de jure):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustus#Octavian_becomes_Augustus
“When Augustus failed to stand for election as consul in 22 BC, fears arose once again that Augustus was being forced from power by the aristocratic Senate. In 22, 21, and 19 BC, the people rioted in response, and only allowed a single consul to be elected for each of those years, ostensibly to leave the other position open for Augustus.[140] In 22 BC there was a food shortage in Rome which sparked panic, while many urban plebs called for Augustus to take on dictatorial powers to personally oversee the crisis.[127]“
As a matter of fact, Rome also provides the best historical precedent to the way WASPs have gradually lost their control over the United States.
The arch-pessimist Oswald Spengler saw the roots of Roman corruption already well before the advent of the empire – like Machiavelli, he thought that the republic started its downward slide already in the 2nd century BC:
http://home.alphalink.com.au/~radnat/spengler/hourfour.html
“From the time of the murder of the Gracchi and of their great opponent, the younger Scipio Africanus, the power of ancient Roman tradition to preserve the State dwindled rapidly. Marius, a man of the lower classes, and not even of Roman origin, created the first army that was based, not on universal conscription, but on the recruitment of paid volunteers who were personally attached to him, and proceeded with this army to launch a pitiless and sanguinary attack on the fundamental relationships in Rome. The older generations, trained for centuries in the statesmanship and sense of moral responsibility that had given Rome its position as a world power, were to a large extent exterminated. The Roman Sertorius attempted to found a rival state in Spain with the aid of the barbarous races there, and Spartacus roused the slaves of Italy to wipe out all that Rome meant. The war against Jugurtha and the Catilinarian Conspiracy revealed the deterioration of the ruling classes themselves, whose uprooted elements were prepared at any moment to appeal to the country’s enemy and the mob of the Forum in support of their sordid financial interests. Sallust was perfectly right – it was for the sake of cash, whereof the mob and the rich speculators were equally greedy, that the honour and greatness of Rome, its race and its idea, went down in ruin.”
By 200 AD, a North African-born general Septimius Severus (whom Machiavelli mentioned as an example of a ruler who was capable of being “lion and fox” simultaneously) had become the emperor of Rome.
I have read somewhere that once Severus rose to power, all Latin-born officers in the border troops under his command were fragged or purged, and new barbarian recruits took their place. From this time on, native Romans of Italy no longer really controlled Rome’s armed forces, which were more and more manned by semi-barbarous peoples from the Balkan peninsula (Illyrians) and then by Germanic peoples.
That’s fantastic stuff, Petr.
The Aristides whom Peter discusses is, of course, to be distinguished from Aristides the Apologist, a Christian. The only reason I mention him is because he had some interesting racial opinions: he said that the world was composed of four races, Barbarian, Greco-Roman, Jew, and Christian.
Calling Christians a “race” of their own in the figurative sense is not without New Testament precedent, of course, but Aristides seems to have used the term in a more literal sense and without allowing for nuance (e.g., admitting that one could be a Christian and be a Barbarian or Roman without any contradiction.)
At first, it seems that his ideas are in line with what most evangelicals believe today; but actually, most American evangelicals think more like the other Aristides, and would say, “My race is American,” thinking that, by defining race along civic rather than genetic lines, they are somehow escaping “racism.”
Of course you realize that this supremacy of the white race (well, the WASP) didn’t really become apparent until the mid-19th century or later. The British Empire lost millions of settlers and colonizers along the North African Coast and elsewhere, something that shouldn’t happen to a supposedly superior race. The almighty Anglo-Saxon’s standing army numbered less that all European nations minus Sardinia in the late-eighteenth, early nineteenth century. The imperial majesty of the United States did not dawn until around the era of Mark Twain or thereabouts.
The cowardice of the racist who insulates himself from the world of tragedy and despair, who seeks perpetual shelter from the big, nasty and godless world is the ultimate cultural mollycoddle. The fearful milksop who cares for absolutely nothing other than his own sheltered little world. The glory days of sitting on the patio with children playing in the cool breeze. While all the while soak-stained black people work like dogs (I would like to take a moment to note an observation by the character Edith Cortwright from “Dodsworth” by Sinclair Lewis ((The most American of novelists!)). This woman noted with disdain the mongrel American culture of the 1920s what with black jazz bands, Greek waiters and Italian patrons. But if whites are indeed superior then on what grounds are WASPs superior to Frenchmen and Frenchmen superior to Greeks? Was not Ancient Greece a cultural powerhouse while savage England indulged in perpetual rapine!)
Ultimately the admin and his compatriots care for nothing other then the sanctity of their own fragile skin. To think it is your God-given right to live sheltered lives free from the rough and tumble is the height of folly.
(To add further to the observation of white supremacy one must note the folly of 17th century Englishmen who had a fascination with hermaphrodites and believed it was indeed possible to morph from a man into a woman (What with the Galenic notion of the vagina being the inverted penis.) It was also thought possible to convert one’s race during the eighteenth century as written by Dror Wahrman in “The Making of the Modern Self.”)
Is this blog about propagating the Christian Message? Or is it written from the simplistic notion that the almighty WASP stands first and foremost amongst the bedraggled peoples of the world?
Uh, what?
I wish I knew what you’re talking about, Bill. Why are you changing the subject to supremacy? I have a very simple question for you. Is it morally wrong for us to work for the survival of the white race? Put another way, is the only morally legitimate policy the extinction of our race? If your answer is yes then are you not advocating genocide?
“Supremacy” is not even on our radar screen. In fact, I believe Asians to be superior to us in some respects. All we want is the right to claim a name and place among the nations of the earth, without foreign interference. How is this supremacy? It sounds like equality to me.
Then we can talk about inverted penises, if that’s how you get your kicks.
Bill’s comment brought tears to my jaded eyes. I see things in a new and brilliant light. I’ll never be able to sponge from my mind the horrific image of all those poor Negroes, miserable and stained with soak.
Incidentally, what IS “soak?” And why on earth would my people want to stain black people with it?
Wheeler, would this be a good time to discuss black inventions? I’m thinking of the Super Soaker.
Wheeler, would this be a good time to discuss black inventions? I’m thinking of the Super Soaker.
Good one, Admin!
The Soopahsoakah ranks right up there with (or “wif,” if you will) the traffuhlike and peenabuh. I strongly suspect that we’ll soon be learning that the cloud chamber and the particle accelerator were also invented by Diversities. Probably while they were constructing the pyramids and riding elephants oe’r the Alps.
Of course, I realize that such observations will likely enrage the woman who calls herself “Bill” (the writing style is very feminine…also very Piperish; not much of a distinction, come to think of it).
Let’s not forget about the drive-by shooting, a legitimate Negro invention.
So is Bill running an evangelical she-male ranch or something?