Archive for April, 2005
Why America’s Population Is Aging
Fed Chairman Greenspan is bemoaning the aging of America’s population so USA Today had a special front-page article on it.
Let me tell you how that happened.
Eric Hoffer, who never touched political issues, mused about 1970, “There seems to be a kind of conspiracy against the birth of intelligent children.”
There was.
In the 1960s and 1970s there was a full scale battle for childlessness. A motto of Women’s Liberation was, “It is at least as rewarding for a woman to paint a picture as to have a child.”
Zero Population Growth was at its height.
The third world had many, many children, so the media advocated that the first world be childless to make up for that. Every old conservative was saying that the problem with the world was overpopulation.
Even Wilmot Robertson, who demanded the saving of the white race in his “The Dispossessed Majority,” went with the trend. He advised young white people, “Please, in this overcrowded world, have no more than three children.”
Who were to have the children? Obviously the third world was having more than enough of them. Anyone who said that smart people should have children was, and this is not an exaggeration, a Nazi. National Review announced without qualification that all children were the same.
There was an organization called “No Children” which got lots of publicity. Bob Barker, the big game show host, agreed with his wife to have no children and dedicate himself to taking care of stray animals.
Jewish liberals led in this campaign, a campaign against the long-dead Hitler. Bella Abzug was head of Women’s Liberation.
And guess what population is now in a state of utter collapse?
The Jews, of course.
When your life is dedicated to revenge, you destroy yourself.
Bob the Tackle
Posted by Bob in History, How Things Work on 4/19/2005
I have pointed out that when I was playing high school football, the coach would often shout, “Feel around you, Whitaker, maybe you’re still in bed!”
So the obvious question is, why would the coach let a dunderhead like that play in the game in the first place? In my case, the reason is because I was strong as an ox, if not any brighter.
But my point has to do, not with the tackle, a linesman, like I was, but with the backfield. They are the guys who run for the touchdown. Those in the backfield got the glory when they were running with the ball.
As a result, a coach had a real problem when those backfield heroes were running a fake. In a fake, the quarterback acts as if he has handed the ball off to one ball carrier and then actually hands it to another. The idea is, of course, that while the other team is tackling the guy who doesn’t have the ball, the one who does get the ball goes through for a touchdown and gets the glory.
So the guy who did NOT get the ball is critical. He is the whole point of the fake. For the fake to work he must be a damn good actor and not get the credit with the crowd.
If you are in the line blocking, you are used to not getting roars of approval from the crowd. Not so the backfield. So when a fake is played in high school it is almost impossible for the guy who does NOT get the ball to convince anybody he has it. He just runs it out like he does in practice, and everybody on both teams has been in practice a lot so they know he hasn’t got the ball.
In other words, you are asking the backfielder who does NOT get the ball to run interference while the guy who DOES get the ball runs for the touchdown and gets the glory. The crowd is not going to notice that HE is the one who caused the touchdown any more than they will see the blocker who opened the hole the touchdown runner went through.
In fact, the only person who notices a crucial block or a great fake is the professional scout. Many a wildly cheered backfielder has never understood why the scouts never noticed him. The reason is because that scout is there to find people who will win the game for his team.
To put it simply, the scout is not there just to see who RUNS the touchdowns. He is there to see who CAUSES the touchdowns.
I’ll give you an example from my political career. For years most Republicans were trying to get the black vote. Others could do arithmetic.
Those who could count noticed that the combined conservative Wallace vote and the Nixon vote in 1968 amounted to 57%, a landslide against the left. But in 1972 the Republicans sang the praises of the Magic Political Center, where they could pick up the precious black vote.
Only an evil racist would try to get The Wallace Democrats.
At long, long last, after the disaster of 1974, even many respectable conservatives were coming to the conclusion that they needed those evil Wallace Democrats. William Rusher, publisher of National Review, had been one of the most fanatical opponents of going after those evil Wallace Democrats. In 1974 he had an epiphany. He is one of those few people who can learn from a mistake and declare in public that he had made it.
By the way, this was when Pat Buchanan and Joe Sobran demanded open borders for Mexican immigrants.
So in 1975 William Rusher wrote a book demanding a coalition of Wallace Democrats and conservative Republicans. That was when he met with me. I had a long, long record as a Wallace Democrat vote-getter. In the 1970s I had been in the streets with anti-busing groups and anti-textbook groups. In 1968 I had lived in a campaign headquarters in the steelworker district of Chicago getting the Wallace vote for my conservative Republican candidate. Long before that I had worked the textile worker vote in South Carolina to get them for Goldwater.
And on back, ad infinitum.
I had always gone where no Republican had gone before.
At that point, Rusher’s problem was that he represented an extreme point of view in the conservative establishment. He needed somebody who was reasonably well known where it counted to put him in the mainstream. He needed interference.
I wrote a book that put him back in the middle of the Republican Party. It was called “A Plague on Both Your Houses.”
I even demanded the preservation of the white race in “A Plague on Both Your Houses.”
Rusher did the Foreword to that book, in which he specifically excluded himself from my nasty comments about William Buckley.
I also made remarks in that book about how Reagan was pussyfooting on issues “Wallace voters” were concerned about. I know for a fact those remarks had a HUGE effect on Republican strategy because I knew so many people in the Reagan Administration. I became a Reagan appointee.
When my book came out Rusher’s heresy was forgotten. National Review had a cover article attacking my book.
But then Jeffrey Hart wrote the National Review review of that same book called “Read This One.”
In the meantime nobody noticed how my book made Rusher mainline.
If Whitaker had been trying to make points for Whitaker, the coach would have said, “Feel around you, Whitaker, maybe you’re still in bed.” I became the extremist.
But I was not making points for Bob. I was making points for the team, and Bill Rusher has never forgotten that. Everybody else has, because they are the crowd, not professional scouts.
Conservatives are not pros.
But being for the team is not enough. Rusher needed somebody who was good at what he did.
A scout does not notice how hard you try to work for the team unless you are also a damned good tackle. I am a damned good writer. Publisher’s Weekly and Kirkus gave it rave reviews and the Library Journal recommended it for purchase.
It was a damned good book.
Publisher’s Weekly and Kirkus and the Library Journal all distanced themselves from the opinions I expressed, exactly the way Rusher did. What they said was that it was a genuine, well-written point of view which barely avoided all the third rails of political rhetoric.
Nobody else could have conceived it, much less written it.
So Rusher and Hart became a non-radical point of view. In 1980 the term “Wallace Democrats” was totally forgotten. They became the mainline Reagan Democrats. Reagan ran the touchdown and the Soviet Union was history when he finished.
Could it have happened without me running interference? I doubt it. But others would say I had nothing to do with the final outcome.
Who cares? Our team won, and that was what I was in the game for.
Recently I was walking alone across the bridge over the Moscow River, right in front of the Kremlin. I stopped, turned, and gravely gave that symbol of Soviet tyranny the finger.
It felt good.
Denying the Holocaust
In Germany or France anyone who says that less than six million Jews were killed by the Nazis is given an automatic sentence of one or two years in prison. Any witness for them receives the same sentence, so they are allowed no defense based on evidence.
I know very little about the subject, but I know the Holocaust deniers are right.
Why?
Because I am a freeborn American. I know that anything the government REQUIRES you to believe is not true.
I also know that anyone who cannot face debate and needs the government to outlaw all dispute is, and I use this word rarely and specifically, a liar.
Denying the Holocaust is the duty of every decent person.
Prejudice Is Usually the Opposite of Hate
Posted by Bob in Coaching Session, General on 4/18/2005
Al Franken, Ed Eisner and Alan Colmes really, genuinely hate white gentiles. They call it liberalism.
All three of these men are Orthodox Jews.
Only the other extreme from Orthodox Jews are the Hasidic Jews. Hasidic Jews vote more solidly conservative than any other religious group in America. A Hasidic Jew will not let a gentile into his home. They don’t hate us, they just don’t want anything to do with us.
As an old Southern segregationist, I see nothing wrong with that attitude. Respectable conservatives hate it.
A lot of black students want to go to prestigious universities, but they want their own dormitories. Respectable conservatives scream bloody murder about this. I am willing to bet that the black students who want those segregated dorms spend less time saying bad things about whites than other black students do. They don’t hate us. They just don’t want anything to do with us.
That suits me down to the ground. If black students feel more comfortable with other blacks, I don’t want revenge on them. A lot of us whites feel more comfortable with our own people, too. We can’t do that. So does that mean we should keep black students from doing that?
That’s revenge, and I am not big on it.
4/16/05 Bob’s WOL Weekly Articles
Posted by Bob in WOL Weekly Articles on 4/16/2005
WhitakerOnline.org Weekly Articles
April 16, 2005
Minutemen, the Media and the Border: A Sense of Humor Is a Sense of Proportion
Stepping On The Toes That COUNT
Cases Where It Wasn’t “Real Trouble”
Real Trouble Is Sedition
Fun Quote:
Repeat:
A sense of humor is a sense of proportion.
.
Minutemen, the Media and the Border: A Sense of Humor Is a Sense of Proportion
Let us say that you are in Britain in 1916. Across the English Channel, men are being killed in numbers never even imagined in history before. On the front in France a whole generation is dying in poison gas, on barbed wire, by charging into machine guns, by being bitten by huge rats in the trenches.
This has been going on for two years.
Then someone goes from Britain across the Channel for a soccer game, and the press suddenly announces, “There is trouble in France.” All the media go down to see, besides this routine World War I, what might happen in this soccer game to cause REAL trouble in Europe.
Wouldn’t that be sad? Wouldn’t that be insane?
Wouldn’t that be so nuts it would be hard to comment on?
What do you do when everybody loses all sense of proportion?
Our prisons in the two largest states, Texas and California, are burgeoning with murderers and rapists who have crossed the border illegally. Mexico routinely protects Mexican rapists and murderers who go back to their homeland after child molesting, murder and more against American citizens.
But the Minutemen went down to the border and the media were suddenly galvanized. Suddenly, without the slightest awareness of how ridiculous they were being, they all announced that there might be real trouble on the Mexican border.
After decades of massive slaughter by those crossing the border, we are suddenly faced with “real” trouble.
And what is this “real” trouble? Some Americans, the Minutemen, are going down to the border and reporting illegals to the border patrol.
Like a soccer team crossing the Channel in 1916, these Minutemen are about to cause “real” trouble on the Rio Grande.
And nobody cracks a smile.
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - -
Stepping On The Toes That COUNT
There is a certain insane logic to the press declaring that Minutemen could cause “REAL trouble on the border.”
The same insane logic applies to that soccer team, in the middle of World War I, that might cause REAL trouble in France.
You see, millions of young men were dying in France, but that was not REAL trouble.
Why? Because the Authorities were getting those young men killed. Sure they were dying in horrible agony, but the Proper Authorities were doing it. Prime Ministers and generals have every right to kill a few million young people if they feel like it. That’s why they are generals. That’s why they are Prime Ministers.
But the soccer team is not the Proper Authorities. There could be a riot at that soccer game, a riot which the Proper Authorities did not authorize.
Sure a few hundred Americans will be attacked this week by illegal immigrants the Proper Authorities, meaning the Border Patrol, let get into the United States.
So what?
The Border Patrol is the Proper Authority. It is doing its job. That’s not REAL trouble.
The Minutemen are going to cause REAL trouble on the border because they are just American citizens, not Proper Authorities. And that is exactly what the media are talking about.
What would happen to the media if just anybody were allowed to report the news? They wouldn’t be “the media” anymore.
What would happen if just any American were allowed to protect his nation’s border? What would happen if a bunch of people who called themselves “The Sons of Liberty” started taking action against the Proper Authorities appointed by His Majesty King George III?
It could cause a revolution.
It DID cause a revolution. So the “real trouble” on the border has nothing to do with murderers or rapists or child molesters being protected in Mexico.
The media are saying that “real trouble” has nothing to do with death or destruction happening to human beings. “Real trouble” is not when the rights of the people are violated. “Real trouble” means that the rights of the BORDER PATROL are being violated.
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - -
Cases Where It Wasn’t “Real Trouble”
One average citizen was financially ruined because he made a joking remark about terrorism in an airport. He said something like, “You better look in my luggage. There might be bomb in there.”
He spent years spending all his money trying to stay out of prison for his remark.
Then an ex-governor of South Carolina was caught with a pistol in his carry-on luggage.
But the ex-governor was a Proper Authority. The press reported it, it was an embarrassment to him, but everybody laughed it off.
The media were outraged when Teddy Kennedy ended up on one of those Potential Terrorist lists. If YOU end up as one of those computer glitches naming YOU as a former terrorist, nobody in the media will be outraged about it.
If somebody executes a repeat child-killer, the media will be outraged. If you are killed on the street tomorrow by a repeat criminal, no one will care.
You are NOT a “Proper Authority.” What happens to you is of no importance to the media. The media are Proper Authorities, too. The media have FCC licenses. The Border Patrol have badges.
You don’t matter. Proper Authority is what matters.
If you carry a gun to protect yourself, you are a trouble-maker.
This year, a few hundred nurses and other hospital workers will be assaulted and crippled or killed on their way to the hospital because they are not allowed to have any means of self-defense. They can’t carry weapons on the way to the hospital because weapons are forbidden IN the hospital.
You see, having a gun in a hospital is just “asking for trouble.”
Why?
Because hospital workers don’t have badges. Hospital workers are not Proper Authorities.
Sure, you could call it “trouble” if a health care worker gets shot on the street by an armed thug. But that is not REAL trouble.
The Minutemen are REAL trouble because they are infringing on the rights of people with badges, the Border Patrol, the Proper Authorities. Health care workers being killed on the street is not REAL trouble. It is only REAL trouble if they defend themselves, because that is the monopoly of the Proper Authorities.
If health care workers protect themselves, they are infringing on the rights of the guys with badges, the only Proper Authorities who have the right to carry guns.
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - -
Real Trouble Is Sedition
History says that the media are right about what REAL TROUBLE is.
History says that if the Proper Authorities don’t protect other Proper Authorities, it can lead straight to revolution.
First the people start challenging the rights of the Proper Authorities to govern them, just because they feel that the Proper Authorities don’t give a damn what happens to them. Pretty soon the people will start to say that the people, “We the People of the United States of America,” should actually RUN things.
And if the people start running things for their own benefit, what will happen to the Proper Authorities?
No, the media tell us, “We the People” have no right to take over. This is a country of Laws, not of mere men.
The media are dead right about this. The lawyers are right about this. The police are right about this.
When the people begin to think in terms of their own rights instead of the rights of the police and the lawyers and the media, it will not just be “real trouble.”
It will be a revolution.
An American Revolution!
How subversive can you get?
4/16/05 Insider Letter
Posted by Bob in Insider Letter Archive on 4/16/2005
(Reprinted to Blog from email list of 4/16/05)
*** Bob’s Insider’s Message ***
I may have to retract a statement I made last month on “The Political Cesspool” radio program. On that broadcast, I commented that the producers of Sean Hannity’s radio program must have to work really hard to find him guests dumber than he is.
Driving along the other evening, I happened to tune into a replay of the Sean Hannity Show. He was interviewing a member of the Minutemen. At first, I was pleasantly surprised to hear that the Minutemen were getting some national exposure on a major media outlet. But as the interview went on, it became obvious why Hannity has become such a media darling. He is a Respectable’s Respectable.
Sean was praising the Minutemen, and going on about how he needed to come down there himself, etc. He said he just couldn’t understand why the Republicans won’t seize the issue of border security. The Minuteman spokesman was gushing on about how much they all liked Hannity, and tuned into his programs.
So, you are saying, maybe ole Sean isn’t so bad after all. He was praising the Minutemen! But was he praising them for turning back the tide of Mexicans and other unwanteds? Well, not exactly.
Hannity was praising the Minutemen for their approach. They were being non-confrontational, and most importantly, were keeping “racist groups” as far away from the operation as possible. He then went on to say he didn’t care what kind of immigration policy we had, as long as we had one. In other words, he wanted laws put on the books and followed, even if they created even more immigration!
I am sure Hannity wants a Guest Worker Program exactly the way O’Reilly does. It was the Guest Worker Program in Europe that began the program that will make Europe fifty percent Moslem by the middle of this century.
Guest Worker Programs NEVER work.
To put it down where the hogs can get to it, Hannity wants a Respectable Immigration Policy. One that doesn’t actually solve the problem, which is non-white immigration into the country, but one that follows the rules, whatever those rules may be.
And he was adamant that “racists” not be involved. I suppose he would rather have his wife raped and children murdered than have a “racist” step in and defend them. Well, at least, YOUR wife and children. I’m sure he lives in a well guarded community in Long Island.
So Sean Hannity is smart enough to do his job, and do it well. Hopefully, more of our people will become smart enough to see through him.
President Whitaker Would Give Everybody a Gun Permit
Posted by Bob in Musings about Life on 4/15/2005
When someone asks me what job I would most like to have, I always answer, “Ex-President.”
An ex-president gets the same salary for life that a serving member of the Cabinet like the Secretary of Defense gets. He gets a huge office and staff. He gets Secret Service protection. He gets a few million up front for his memoirs and makes speeches for a hundred grand a clip on a bad day.
Or he can follow the Thurgood Marshall Route. When Thurgood Marshall announced he was retiring from the Supreme Court, reporters asked him what he was going to do after that.
Marshall replied:
“Sit on my ass.”
But there is always a fly in the ointment. The biggest obstacle to my making the career move I desire is that, in order to be an ex-president, you have to be president first.
My chances of being elected president are slightly less than the probability of my being named as the new pope.
The president alone has very little power to change things. But one thing I could do ( some will object, but I know how it could be done) would be to declare a state of emergency on crime and make every American citizen a Federal agent with the right to carry a weapon.
I would then ask congress to give me the money to make this agent status limited to those who are repeat felons or insane or congressmen. That would require a good deal of money which the president does not have. But I would give them a deadline of three months. If the money is not forthcoming, EVERYBODY would get a permit.
If the courts don’t like it, I would tell them what President Jackson did, “The Supreme Court has made their decision, now let them enforce it.”
As president, I would be saying that a LOT.
Shepard Smith is a Southerner
Posted by Bob in Musings about Life on 4/15/2005
Shepard Smith on Fox News is a Southerner, and he makes no bones about it. He just said, “We still have some Southern civility here.” He refers to the South by its other name, God’s Country. He speaks fondly of the University of Mississippi Rebels.
Smith has no Southern “accent.” But on the air, Roger Mudd has no “accent” either. But in person, Mudd has a VERY Southern “accent.”
I put “accent” in quotes because WE don’t talk funny, THEY do. Right after Jimmy Carter won the election of 1976, Tennessee Ernie Ford said, “Finally we are going to have a president who doesn’t have an accent.”
Smith talks like a Southerner. He makes fast jokes and is entertaining. He makes you relax.
And I always suspect he knows a lot of things he’s not allowed to say.
Bible Belter
Blog readers have decided to agree that Bob is very, very smart.
If I say I am not very, very smart it is like a man who is seven feet tall saying that he is really short. If a seven foot tall man says that, he is not being modest, he is being absurd.
So when I say something, it usually means a bit more than I say.
When I say I am a Bible Belter, people naturally think I am trying to be just a guy like everybody else. When I tell you that I am from Pontiac, South Carolina, I am happy if it gives you a smile. Ole Bob is just showing he’s a country boy.
That’s nice, but you’re missing the point.
Your smile when I say I am from Pontiac makes me feel a bit lonely, because you don’t understand that there is something profound here that I am trying to say.
A good friend of mine, who through no fault of his own is now a professor, came into the graduate economics program at the University of Virginia a year after I did. He first met me at the cocktail party for new students. The first thing he heard about me was, “Whitaker is cutting everybody down again.”
Whitaker was this unapologetic South Carolina racist who only took two or three sentences to make all the anti-racists look like fools. One after another the people who had qualified to enter one of the best graduate programs in America went up to use their devastating anti-racist arguments against Whitaker.
Whitaker cut every one of them to pieces, quickly, with common-sense arguments. My friend was kind enough to say that that was the first thing he heard about me.
I remember when I was at another party and a liberal Jewish professor decided to take me on. One of my economics professors stopped him by saying,
“He’ll beat you, you know. He’ll make you look like a fool.”
They ARE fools. And I AM a very smart man.
So when I say I am a Bible Belter I am not being modest. When I say I am from Pontiac, South Carolina, I am not trying to be Just Folks.
When I say I am from Pontiac, South Carolina, I am not just saying that I have my feet on the ground. I am saying I have roots a mile deep.
When I say I am a Bible Belter I am not saying that I am a Good Old Boy. What I mean is that I could sit down with any of our forefathers who spoke in terms of the Old Testament or, before them, those who spoke in terms of the Wodenist Faith, and they would understand me perfectly and I would understand them perfectly.
I am from the Bible Belt. I am in sync with thousands of years of my people’s history.
The so-called intellectuals follow “the literature,” the latest articles, in their field of study. To me, they are weeds. My roots are a mile deep.
The friend I mentioned above made a very profound remark to me. I kept telling people I was a Bible Belter and from Pontiac, SC and I made fun of myself.
But one day he said to me, “Bob, you are the most conceited person I have ever met.” I was astonished. How could Good Ole Bob be conceited?
He said, “You REALLY don’t give a damn what people think of you. A lot of people say they don’t but you REALLY don’t. You are dead sure you are right, and I agree with you, you ARE right. But you can’t get more conceited than that.”
That sent my mind reeling. He really understood me.
I am conceited beyond the imagination of most people. I consider all the “intellectuals” to be pretentious morons.
That is an understatement. I consider them less than that.
I stand above them like a tower. I am a genius man with roots a mile deep.
How could anybody get more conceited than that?
If You Can’t Do Arithmetic, You Can’t Understand History
“The sad little lizard said he was a Tyrannosaurus Rex on his mother’s side.”
A lot of people say they are descended from kings and other great notables.
Actually, they’re probably right. It’s a matter of arithmetic. If you say you are descended from King Richard of the Lion Heart, you are going back seven hundred years. That’s over twenty generations.
You had two parents, four great grandparents, eight great-grandparents and sixteen great great grandparents. And that’s only going back four generations. If you go back twenty generations, you have a million direct ancestors. So there are a lot of kings and earls back there, if on the bar sinister if nothing else.
I talk about the Reverend Alexander Whitaker at Jamestown. He had no children, but his brother Jabez was one of my thousand direct ancestors ten generations ago.
But I have the name, so I claim the fame. I talk about the Reverend Alexander because he makes such important points about Southern history. He wrote the first book in English written in America, baptized Pocahontas, and did a lot of other things. My point is that he did all that and he died BEFORE the Mayflower got to America.
So now you can see how important this generational arithmetic is. You are descended from kings.
But population arithmetic is essential to understanding history. If you understand basic arithmetic, you understand how ridiculous this whole business of “a nation of immigrants” is.
Adam Smith wrote his book The Wealth of Nations in 1776. In that book he said that Americans had huge families. He said that the American population doubled by natural increase every twenty to twenty-five years.
Do the math. Jamestown was founded in 1607. If the American population doubled every twenty to twenty-five years, a hundred people in Jamestown would have multiplied to five or ten thousand people by 1776.
Most people seem to think there were a lot of immigrants in America when the Constitution was written. As a matter of fact, when the Constitution was written in 1787, America’s white population had a higher percentage of native-born Americans than it has ever had.
There was wave after wave of immigration to America in the 1600′s. Germans poured into the mountains of North Carolina, including my Snyder ancestors. Thousands of Puritans moved into New England. Thousands of Huguenots and Scots and Germans went to South Carolina.
But the huge waves of immigrants ended about 1710. By the time Constitution was written, even the last wave had multiplied at least eight times. Earlier immigrants had multiplied a hundred times, and all those hundreds of thousands were native-born white Americans. By 1789 almost all Americans came from families who had been born here for over a century.
It is a matter of simple arithmetic. When the Constitution talked about “We the People of the United States and OUR posterity” it did NOT mean a nation of immigrants. A person whose family has been born in America for over a century no more thinks of himself as an immigrant than an American Indian does.
We welcomed immigrants, but we didn’t HAVE to. Back then immigrants had a lot of the talents we needed and we were glad to have them. But that was for the good of ourselves and our posterity, not because we were a bunch of immigrants ourselves.
“We the People of the United States of America and OUR posterity” says nothing about immigrants automatically having rights under the Constitution. Only the immigrants who were good for ourselves and our posterity were welcome.
And “We the people of the United States and OUR posterity” certainly gives no rights whatsoever to ILLEGAL immigrants. In fact, the Founding Fathers attitude to immigrants is best expressed by the MEXICAN Constitution.
This is what the MEXICAN Constitution says about immigrants, both legal and illegal (my translation):
“If Mexican authorities determine that the residence of a non-Mexican is NOT ADVANTAGEOUS to Mexico, that person WILL be compelled to leave Mexico immediately.”
No hearings. No appeals. Mexico is for Mexicans.
Any native-born American who says this is a nation of immigrants is giving away his birthright.
Any Hispanic who votes for illegal immigrants over American citizens is not an American, no matter where he was born.
Good Point, Jay!
Posted by Bob in Coaching Session on 4/14/2005
Jay said,
“I would agree that most of the people, the Average Joe, I’ve met at bars, work, or in everyday life might meet this profile. However, a huge number of people associated with the pro-white “Movement”, many of them very intelligent, have minds that are cluttered with all kinds of nonsense. From nazism to Christian Identity, they are all Pod People and being such, should be rocketed back into outer space from whence they came. It’s time to return to good ol’ fashioned Grandpa’s “racism”, not this skinhead Hitler worship crapola. ”
YES! If we concentrated on saving our race and the fact that the respectable conservatives are demanding genocide against white people, we could win.
That’s Grandpa’s “racism” and it’s mine.
All the freakish crapola is deadly to our real cause.
Know How Much You Know
Posted by Bob in How Things Work on 4/12/2005
A non-racist once made a very perceptive remark to me. He said:
“The racists I know come in two types. They are very, very ignorant or they are the smartest people I have ever met.”
This was in the course of saying I was one of the smartest people he had ever met, but my opinions were not the ones “smart people” were supposed to have.
What he called “ignorant” described the sort of people I feel comfortable with. They are working people whose minds are not cluttered with fashionable nonsense. So they have no problem saying they don’t know and they are willing to listen to sense.
From the Yuppie point of view, they are hopeless yokels.
From my point of view, the Yuppies have all the intellectual capacity of a brick wall, while those “ignorant yokels” are real people.
What makes me feel good about this concept that people who are worried about the white race are either quote ignorant unquote or brilliant is because it reminds me of Jesus.
Jesus confounded the High Priests with his brilliance when He was about twelve years old. Then He gave up on the Old Testament scholars and went out and talked to the “ignorant” and the sinners.
I keep realizing that everything I think of Jesus already did and said better.
Jesus is welcome to the patent. I just want to use the produce He produced.
Thanks, Don!
Posted by Bob in Comment Responses on 4/12/2005
Don is writing his own blog here. Don writes a LOT.
But wait a minute, Bob, isn’t this Bob’s Blog?
It certainly is, and Bob’s Blog is about getting you people THINKING. I am not interested in just sitting here talking to myself.
I got Don to thinking and writing. I would like to get YOU to thinking and writing.
I take credit for what YOU write. I take credit for what my book team does because they wouldn’t have done it without me.
I take credit for the Hubble Telescope because it wouldn’t be up there if it wasn’t for me. I take credit for the fact that the INS was stopped from imposing racial quotas on private schools thirty years ago because I USED other people to stop it.
And they appreciated my go-ahead.
I take credit for many, many ideas that I got started.
That is what power, real power, is. I have changed the world in more ways than I can count.
In his autobiography Ben Franklin said that, if you want something done, be sure someone else gets the credit for it. They deserve it. You can spend your life on doing one thing, or you get the ball rolling and find other people to do the job better than you can.
The only thing that worries me about Don’s comments is that he is the only one who is doing it. I come here twice a day to moderate comments. What really depresses me is when I see “Comments to be Moderated (0).”
Which seems to mean that what I said didn’t hit any buttons in your mind.
I think what I say should get you to THINKING.
Keep it up, Don.
And as for the rest of you, I’d like to kick you in what you seem to think is your brain.
Do You Believe in Evolution?
When somebody asks me, “Do you believe in evolution?” it always reminds me of an old Bible Belt joke.
Somebody asked a man, “Do you believe in baptism?”
He replied, “BELIEVE in it? Hell, man, I’ve seen it DONE!”
Not only does everybody believe in evolution, everybody has seen it. The reason free enterprise works is because most businesses fail. The strong and efficient businesses tend to survive.
That’s evolution.
Any experienced person looking at a litter of puppies knows which ones are most likely to survive.
BELIEVE in evolution? Hell, we’ve seen it done!
The question is not, “Do you believe in evolution? The question is how much of the development of life does Darwin’s particular theory of evolution explain?
And, just as important, if you have a better explanation than evolution, then what is your evidence for your particular alternative? A Japanese who follows the Shinto religion would explain that the alternative explanation of life has to do with the Goddess Who Invites.
I don’t NEED to believe that evolution explains everything. I don’t NEED for evolution NOT to explain things. Some people are terrified that their version of God will not fit into a Darwinian world.
I know very well that Darwin was dead wrong about a lot of things. I also know you cannot explain many things in life by simple evolution. But nothing in my world revolves around what evolution explains.
Before you discuss any subject, you should first ask yourself what your stake in the answer may be.
Minutemen and Regulators
I have been reading a book called The History of Edgefield County (South Carolina). It is an 1890 book that was never reprinted.
After all, there are some aspects of Massachusetts history and the history of Jewish migration into New York City that have not yet been covered, so who has time for South Carolina?
Anyway, one problem that Edgefield County, which is on the northwestern edge of South Carolina, had was that all the law courts were in Charleston. Taking a felon all the way from Edgefield to Charleston was not worthwhile.
So Edgefield set up its own vigilantes. Students of Southern history will know the term they went by, The Regulators.
At first, the authorities in Charleston raised hell that Edgefield would dare take the law into their own hands that way. But those “vigilantes” forced them to put law courts in Edgefield County.
Which reminds me of the Minute Men on the Mexican border today. You can take action or you can sit there and beg. The authorities don’t care if you beg. But if you take the law into your own hands and threaten their power and their livelihood, it is a whole different matter.
4/9/05 Bob’s WOL Weekly Articles
Posted by Bob in WOL Weekly Articles on 4/9/2005
WhitakerOnline.org Weekly Articles
April 9, 2005
Lions and Tigers and Vigilantes, Oh No!
Will There Be Trouble at the Border?
What Are CIVILIANS Doing Protecting the Border?
Everybody Knows Who the Hispanic-”Americans” Are Loyal To
Fun Quote:
If you ever get the feeling that everybody hates you, let Uncle Bob offer you this reassurance:
Most people don’t even KNOW you.
Feel better now?
.
Lions and Tigers and Vigilantes, Oh No!
Bush and the media are attempting to smear the Minutemen by calling them “vigilantes.” Do you think the average American has any idea where the term comes from? Bush and the media are counting on the fact that the average American has no idea what the word means. They are counting on the fact that the average American will recoil in horror at the term.
A “vigiliante” was a member of a “vigilance committee.” What is a “vigilance committee” you might ask, if you are braver than the average American?
Break down the phrase into two words to make it easy. Everyone knows what a committee is.
What about “vigilance?” It means “alert watchfulness” according to the dictionary.
A “vigilance committee” is a group of men assembled to maintain watchful alertness.
In the old west, they were citizens who had to keep watch against lawlessness. There was no government to protect them. They had to do it themselves. Of course in that sense they were a government, and they were freely elected.
So why are George Bush and the media so afraid of “vigilantes?”
Maybe the last thing they want from Americans is “alert watchfulness.”
After all, isn’t that the job Americans expect from Bush and the media?
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - -
Will There Be Trouble at the Border?
For decades millions of Mexicans have been coming across the border every year in violation of the law.
The prisons of our two biggest states, California and Texas are overcrowded largely because of Mexicans who came across that border illegally and committed crimes here.
Every year a huge number of those illegal aliens go back across that border so that Mexico can protect them against being punished for their crimes. A few of them have been photographed by American media walking the streets of Mexico City.
American media openly admits that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
But now the media is in a frenzy about the fact that there could be trouble on the Mexican border.
That is because a few hundred Americans called the Minutemen have decided to go down to the Mexican border and report illegal aliens to the Border Patrol.
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - -
What Are CIVILIANS Doing Protecting the Border?
Many in the media are demanding to know why CIVILIANS are down there helping protect the American border?
The answer to this is very simple. America is the first country in world history to declare that our armed forces have no right to defend their country’s borders. What if you had told the Founding Fathers that the American armed forces had no right to defend our borders?
They would have put you in the madhouse where you belonged.
The military is prohibited from protecting the border. Civilians are prohibited from protecting their border.
Decades of experience make one thing clear: the so-called Border Patrol is totally ineffective.
The media are terribly worried that the Minutemen may upset the wonderful situation at the border and Mexico will be upset by these nasty Minutemen. President Bush never even mentions any of the murders and rapes committed by illegal aliens or the protection of murderers and rapists by the Mexican Government. But he is denouncing those “vigilantes” who are reporting illegal aliens to the Border Patrol.
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - -
Everybody Knows Who the Hispanic-”Americans” Are Loyal To
Hispanic-Americans have no loyalty to the United States, and Bush and the media are loyal only to them.
Everybody knows that any politician who tries to do anything about illegal aliens will lose if he has Hispanic voters. The media agree that California Republicans cut their own throats politically when they tried to keep Americans from paying for benefits to known illegal aliens.
Hispanic voters who call themselves Americans have no loyalty at all to Americans. Their only loyalty is to other Hispanics.
If they want me to stop saying that, they will have to stop voting that way.
We all know that the reason Bush opposes protecting the US border is precisely because Hispanic voters are loyal only to other Hispanics, America be damned.
That is the rule Bush lives by. But nobody is allowed to state the rule Bush lives by in plain English.
I just did.
4/9/05 Insider Letter
Posted by Bob in Insider Letter Archive on 4/9/2005
(Reprinted to Blog from email list of 4/9/05)
*** Bob’s Insider’s Message ***
My regular WOL readers are probably getting tired of my constant harping about “respectable” conservatives. But I keep on this subject because it takes a long time for simple, direct truths to sink in.
You see, respectables aren’t just misguided, or ignorant, or trying to stay “under the radar.” They are plainly and simply whores for the government/media establishment. Here is another article which states this clearly.
If anyone still can’t quite grasp that fact, then take a few minutes to think about the Minuteman Project, which is going on right now. Here are hundreds of volunteers, many of them seasoned police and border patrol veterans, who are going down to the Mexican border to try and get the government to do its job.
Yet how are they portrayed in the media? Vigilantes, cowboy wannabes, etc. Illegal immigrants are given sympathetic portrayals, while American patriots are treated with derision.
What the Minutemen are staging the most important populist movement since the Wallace campaign. There are signs of it growing as people catch on to what they are doing.
This poses a big problem for the government, and so their lapdogs in the media must bark and growl. They CANNOT let Americans take back control of OUR borders.
Any sign of trouble or conflict will be played up by the media as the fault of the Minutemen. I hope that I don’t have to explain this to my regular readers, but it is vital that you learn to take EVERYTHING you see in the media with a grain of salt, in the same way you would take a come-on by a woman hanging out of a strip club door on Bourbon Street. The latter is much more sincere.
The Minuteman campaign is just what we need. Hopefully it will grow into an unstoppable movement. It is just like what I’ve been preaching about doing on our campuses. There is no reason we can’t do both.
Bob
The Amish Sin
Posted by Bob in Bob, Coaching Session, Musings about Life on 4/8/2005
The worst sins good people commit are not the things they do, but the things they do not do. This is why I am one of the few people on earth who can say, “I have all the money I WANT.” If you are truly wealthy, have few needs, and you are burdened with a Northern European conscience that won’t let you use a priest or a book to make your choices for you, lots of money is a true burden.
Lots of money means you can do many good things. That means lots of decisions and lots of regrets. If you really don’t want much, that makes it worse. That means all the money above your few wants is free to be used to do good, but not to make you happy. It is nothing but decisions, it is nothing but a burden.
So I have all the money I WANT.
If I had a billion dollars, I could use what I call The Amish Approach. I could just pretend that billion dollars wasn’t there. I could just stick it all in a mutual fund picked at random and go home and live the old-fashioned way.
The Amish just act like modern technology doesn’t exist. They say they only use technology that was in the Bible. That, of course, is nonsense. Biblical people would have given anything for the spring shock absorbers and paved highways the Amish have for their buggies.
Not to mention the lack of a thousand diseases and the intestinal worms and malnutrition every PHARAOH suffered from.
But, nonsense aside, everybody thinks the Amish are just wonderful. The Amish are charming and perfect innocents because they refuse to take any responsibility for the power man now has through technology.
Mahatma Ghandi had the Amish Charm. When Mahatma Ghandi went to visit the homes of the rich and famous, he would sit in the middle of the floor and spin cloth with his famous old-fashioned spinning-wheel.
Every “Christian” leader said that was just wonderful.
It’s not.
As with the Amish, it’s not only silly, it’s sinful.
Ghandi had every right to starve himself or sit on the floor spinning. Ghandi had every right to keep his dozen or so women to “take care” of him. The Amish can play eighteenth century with my blessings. It’s cute.
But meanwhile the rest of us have real decisions to make because we are part of a society that has real power. Nobody on either side would care to answer my question of whether the power to keep someone alive – whether you call it “life support” or not – is the responsibility BOTH of the person who turns it ON and of the person who turns it OFF.
We have the power to extend human life. We are getting the power to manipulate genes. The modern Amish say God will be happy with us if we just abdicate responsibility for all that and follow some good old rules that never imagined such situations.
“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Too many people forget that that also means, “Do unto yourself as you would do unto others.” The pope could have extended his infinitely precious life on this earth for a few days if he had gone to the hospital. He chose not to do so.
I respect the pope for that, but I also note that what he did was contrary to the official doctrine of the Church that keeping one’s heart beating for one second more is the number one priority. If that were true, there would be no martyrs.
Every time you use power, you are going to use it wrong. That’s human. But acting as if it does not exist is the greatest sin of all. “All that is necessary for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing.”
The Amish Sin, not making the decision, leaves that decision to evil people. In a world where humanity is obtaining greater power every day, the Amish Sin is the greatest sin of all.
They Finally Got DeLay!
Republican House Leader Tom DeLay’s family has been receiving government money. He has been a media ogre for years, and literally millions of hours of media time has been freely spent trying to get something on him, all free and gratis.
One percent of the time spent on DeLay could have gotten hundreds of juicy stories on liberal congressmen on the Hill. In fact, they could release the ones they already have and never report on liberals and John McCain and get a lot more public attention than anything DeLay ever did, murder included.
But this is not a matter of business. DeLay is actually in the way of the liberal agenda and he says things respectable conservatives don’t say. So the media want to replace him as House Republican Leader with a nice, safe, cooperative respectable conservative like House Speaker Hastert. They got Hastert by doing the same thing to Newt Gingrich.
Back in 1973 the Impeach Nixon campaign was in full swing. The people who were enemies of the Nixon White House, the ones named in the infamous Enemies List, were driving Nixon out of office. For the first time in history a sitting president was about to be driven from office.
But the media had another problem. Vice President Agnew had attacked the media publicly. Replacing Nixon with Agnew would not do.
When he was a good liberal Republican Agnew had been part of some of the dirtiest politics in the nation, Maryland state politics. Not only did Marylanders know it, they bragged about it. But Agnew was a liberal Republican. He got rid of Maryland’s anti-miscegenation law, almost the only state anti-miscegenation law ever repealed rather than banned by the courts.
The media loved Agnew through all those decades he spent in pretty open corruption.
But in 1973 the media went after Agnew’s past and got him on the old stuff that had been gathering cobwebs in their files. Before Nixon became the first president ever to be ousted from office, Agnew, by the wildest coincidence, was the first VICE president ever to be ousted from office.
The only other vice president who ever resigned was John C. Calhoun, and he wanted to go back to the Senate. No president ever resigned before Nixon.
Nixon AND AGNEW, president AND vice president.
For the first time in American history.
What a coinkidink!
No Catholic Bishop Has Been Punished for Helping Get Thousands of Little Boys Raped, But This One May go to Prison for Hate Speech
Posted by Bob in Comment Responses on 4/5/2005
Meanwhile, in Saskatchewan, a Christian prison guard ran an ad in
Saskatoon’s daily, simply quoting the biblical injunctions against sodomy.
Three gays brought charges against the printer and the newspaper publisher
before the Saskatchewan commission.
The accused were ordered to pay $1,500 to each of the three complainants.
More important: Quoting anything from the Bible deemed offensive by the
human rights commission is against the law in Saskatchewan.
————————-
Last year, a Quesnel, B.C. school teacher with a universally regarded ”long
and unblemished record” in the school system and ”a notable record of
community service,” was suspended by the B.C. College of Teachers for
writing letters to the local paper opposing gay marriage, in part on the
grounds of rampant homosexual promiscuity.
His job as a teacher denied him the right to express such opinions publicly.
The courts upheld his suspension, and warned that anyone, not just teachers,
who expressed such a view in public was breaking the law.
—————–
Now we have the case where Fred Henry, Catholic bishop of Calgary, is
accused of ”hate” because he represented sodomy as ”evil” in a newspaper
article and in a diocesan letter.
If the Alberta commission decides to hear the case, the bishop can be
counted on to disregard the usual process of ”conciliation,” and instead
provide the board with two thick binders which diocesan lawyers have
compiled in his defense.
If the commission decides against him, judging by his gutsy record, he will
almost certainly defy it and, if need be, go to jail.
—————————
Sun, April 3, 2005
Liberals behind assault on Christianity
By Ted Byfield — Calgary Sun
It seems almost fitting that the next major step in the gradual outlawing of
Christianity in Canada should be taken by one of our so-called ”human
rights” commissions.
For, if the Alberta commission in fact hails Calgary’s Catholic bishop
before it to answer charges that, by proclaiming church doctrine and the
teaching of the Bible he is preaching ”hate,” then surely an important
milestone will have been reached.
It will mean that wherever Christian teaching contradicts the moral
certitudes of the New Canada, then Christians — clergy and laymen alike —
will be ordered to shut up.
And as the norms of the New Canada depart ever farther from those of the
Canada that once was, the restrictions against Christian practice and
teaching will widen.
How long, therefore, before the faith itself is prohibited in the New
Canada’s ongoing march of ”human rights?”
Not very long, perhaps.
If this seems preposterous, look at the Canadian record to date, carefully
set out in an article by London, Ont. columnist Rory Leishman in the current
issue of Touchstone magazine.
In 1995, when the mayor of London, Ont., refused to proclaim a ”Gay Pride”
weekend, she was summoned before a human rights commission, pleaded that her
faith prevented her from endorsing the practice of homosexuality, and was
ordered to proclaim it anyway.
Damages of $10,000 were awarded to the complainant homosexual group.
The mayor ignored the order and was re-elected by a landslide.
Subsequently, the mayors of Fredericton and Kelowna were ordered by human
rights commissions to make such proclamations.
The following year, a Christian printer in Toronto who refused to print
stationery for a lesbian group was ordered by the Ontario human rights
commission to print the stationery and assessed $5,000 in damages.
The commission also ruled that Christian teachings deemed offensive must be
confined to the home and church, and spoken nowhere else.
The printer took the case to the courts, where the rights commission was in
the main upheld. Legal cost to the printer: $100,000.
Last year, a Quesnel, B.C. school teacher with a universally regarded ”long
and unblemished record” in the school system and ”a notable record of
community service,” was suspended by the B.C. College of Teachers for
writing letters to the local paper opposing gay marriage, in part on the
grounds of rampant homosexual promiscuity.
But he had not expressed these view in class, pleaded the teacher.
Irrelevant, said the college.
His job as a teacher denied him the right to express such opinions publicly.
The courts upheld his suspension, and warned that anyone, not just teachers,
who expressed such a view in public was breaking the law.
Meanwhile, in Saskatchewan, a Christian prison guard ran an ad in
Saskatoon’s daily, simply quoting the biblical injunctions against sodomy.
Three gays brought charges against the printer and the newspaper publisher
before the Saskatchewan commission.
The accused were ordered to pay $1,500 to each of the three complainants.
More important: Quoting anything from the Bible deemed offensive by the
human rights commission is against the law in Saskatchewan.
The publisher gave up.
The prison guard has appealed at his own expense.
Now we have the case where Fred Henry, Catholic bishop of Calgary, is
accused of ”hate” because he represented sodomy as ”evil” in a newspaper
article and in a diocesan letter.
If the Alberta commission decides to hear the case, the bishop can be
counted on to disregard the usual process of ”conciliation,” and instead
provide the board with two thick binders which diocesan lawyers have
compiled in his defense.
If the commission decides against him, judging by his gutsy record, he will
almost certainly defy it and, if need be, go to jail.
So what’s next?
An attack on church property tax exemptions obviously, and an attack on the
existence of a Catholic school system, and a removal of the
tax-deductibility of church donations.
Are these dire things inevitable?
Certainly not.
The ultimate author of all this is the Liberal government.
(NOTE FROM BOB: That’s not true. The courts did most of this, and Bush wouldn’t refuse to enforce them either)
If it is returned to office, all these things can be expected.
If it is thoroughly thrashed from coast to coast, that will be the end of
both the New Canada and the ”gay rights” movement for a long time.
In short, this may be our last chance to smarten up.
“Gag” Orders
Posted by Bob in Comment Responses on 4/5/2005
Mark asked me what I meant about people not being able to discuss court orders.
I was referring to “gag orders,” which so far have only been applied to the peoples’ representatives or principles in the case. However, the courts gave themselves the right to issue gag orders against public officials.
Certainly the courts could gag all Hate Speech the way European countries do. They could go on from there.
Do you think the ACLU would SERIOUSLY fight that? Do you think Bush would refuse to enforce it? He would lose the Hispanic vote.
They can give themselves the right to gag anybody. In busing cases, these gag orders were ever more widely extended.
The courts have given themselves the power to tax. Remember, “No Taxation Without Representation?” Courts have regularly ordered taxes to support minority housing and for school integration.
Five members of the United States Supreme Court could gag every American. Since they ARE the Constitution, who would you appeal to?
This Blog: Writing Backwards
In this blog, the later piece is written AFTER the introduction. The latest article is at the top.
I have thought about this odd fact, and have realized it has a great advantage. My aim is write things that are what you have already suspected, but have not had the time to think out.
When you read something here you like, I don’t think you say, “What a novel idea!” I think you say, “So THAT’s it!”
So when I write, I am able to go on with ideas that have already occurred to many of you. For those who want to know the background, it is below. So we can proceed from where a lot of readers have already gotten to.
A good example of this is the slave trap Idea I wrote about below. It is now time to talk about the slave traps, aka, Great Civilizations, of South America.
A lot of people wonder why the Great Civilization of the Incas was thousands of feet up on top of mountains. The reason is because that is where people had to go to escape the dangers of lowland savages. But that mountain top made an excellent slave trap. Thus another Great Civilization was born.
Slave Traps
Historians compare ancient non-Western societies to Western societies.
There is no comparison.
What historians call ancient Great Civilizations were what I call slave traps. Those Great Civilizations built the giant structures historians worship because they had millions of subjects who could go nowhere else.
Egypt’s population could not move out of the narrow strip beside the Nile River.
The Mesopotamian Civilizations were less stable. Mesopotamian means “between the rivers,” the Tigris and the Euphrates, but it was easier to get out of than the Egyptian Strip, the ideal slave trap.
China’s slave traps were the rice paddy cultures. Paddies can only be cultivated beside huge water sources. They were concentrated beside the Hwang Ho and the Yan Tsu Rivers.
For at least a thousand years, Westerners have worried about the Chinese conquering the world. It is a remarkable feat that China has contained almost exactly one fifth of the human race for at least two thousand years.
In the meantime the Chinese never even conquered the parts of CHINA that were outside the rice paddy area. Conquerors came in from outside. China conquered nobody north of them. They conquered more rice paddies in southeast Asia, though.
And lost them.
South America had a lot of brief slave traps, too. But that is a somewhat longer story.
The paddies came from a completely new, invented crop called aquatic rice. China got it from India when India was still ruled by whites around 2000 BC.
The Chinese took aquatic rice back to China and made slave traps out of Hwang Ho and Yang Tsu areas, just as Great Civiliations had developed in the slave traps of the Nile and Mesopotamia.
Thus another Great Civilization emerged.
“Handed Down” to Whom?
Posted by Bob in Law and Order on 4/4/2005
To youm, that’s whom.
James Jackson Kilpatrick pointed out years ago that the United States Supreme Court was described as “handing up” a decision. I have no way of searching this out in a reasonable amount of time.
Today the courts “hand down” decisions. They “hand down” a decision that overruled an overwhelming vote by the California plebescite against giving benefits to illegal aliens. They “handed down” decisions that enforced racial busing against the wishes of eighty to ninety percent of the public, including a majority of blacks.
Before the World War II Generation gave us Obedience Training, “We the People of the United States of America and OUR posterity” were the only purpose of the Constitution. Before the World War II Generation was obedience-trained, “We the People of the United States of America” were the only source of authority the Constitution had.
But now the guys in robes hand DOWN decisions to us. They ARE the Constitution.
We are allowed to debate questions until the guys in the black robes hand a decision DOWN to us. Then they not only make the Final Decision, they can put us in jail for contempt of court if we discuss it.
-
You are currently browsing the archives for April, 2005
Bob’s Books
Bob's first book - 1976 
A PLAGUE ON BOTH YOUR HOUSES
Bob's second book - 1982 
THE NEW RIGHT PAPERS
Bob's deadliest book - 2004 
Why Johnny Can't Think
America's
Professor-Priesthood
Reply to Mike
Posted by Bob in Comment Responses, General on 4/14/2005
Mike says,
“It is hard for someone who has spent a lifetime learning erroneous information to give it up, otherwise they would have to admit to wasting all of that time.”
That is profoundly true.
There has always been a weird alliance between preachers and atheist history professors. It happened this way:
All the scholars went to Palestine to find Biblical history. Then as secular history developed, historians and archeologists used the materials the religious students had found. They found that all history did not happen in Palestine, but they found what they were looking for where they were looking, the Middle East.
So historians traced all of history to Egypt and Mesopotamia, which were studied because they were in Bible.
On the old university library at the University of South Carolina, McKissick, there is emblazoned the motto, “Ex Oriente Lux”, “Truth Comes From the East.”
That was the motto of ATHEIST historians! That is what history is built on. Historians try to trace everything as being “invented” in the Middle East.
So do Bible-believers.
As I said, it is a very odd alliance but a very solid one.
4 Comments