The only idea that I ever got credit for was my statement that, in every big change in our society, the federal courts are always the last resot of those who were going out of power.
In 1934 the courts ruled for the Indians and Andrew Jackson told them to go to hell. In 1857 the Court ruled that the congress could not prevent slavery from being extended i ntot he western territories and the 1860 Republican platform told them to go to hell.
In the 1930s the courts tried to stop the New Deal and Roosevelt tried to pack the court. History says he succeeded, because hsi court-packing plan was rejected. But he kept getting reelected and got himself his own court. Today the courts back every 1960s-style “Social Experiment.”
When the courts are your last bastion, a person who knows history puts the undertaker on alert.
#1 by Dave on 10/06/2006 - 1:15 pm
NOT SPAM
NOT SPAM
The Courts have been defeated by spontaneously occurring segregation.
But my concern is with white bearing and virility.
For example, 200 years ago, despite their defeats, the Scotts still had their “bearing” as a people. At the time of our Revolution, the world was full of Scotsmen who breathed only for the chance to kill an Englishman. They were “Scotts” true.
Look at what pathetic specimens of humanity the Scotts are today. The process of industrialization and English welfare utterly crushed them.
Now everything about them is phony. Their pride is phony. Their nationhood is phony. Their manhood is phony. They are utterly phony in all facets of their existence. It’s horrible.
The same goes for the entire indigenous British working class. They are such a god awful defeated castrated bunch, they are hard to look at. (Nick Griffin needs all the help he can get).
Even the Germans in their low dereliction as defeated people are not as bad.
I could care less what any judge has to say. I have never met a judge in my life that wasn’t an absolute nut bar. Judges are derelicts and perverts.
What matters is the virility and bearing of American whites. Today this virility and bearing is primarily manifested in (so far) an unwillingness to go along with being disarmed.
We need more Bridgette Bardot’s and Alessandra Mussolini’s (Europe is so castrated, only females fight).
Also, it pisses me off that Jared Taylor will go debate a Spic Professor. It tells me that Jared Taylor doesn’t understand the real issue.
The issue is BEARING AND VIRILITY. That means that Spic Professors don’t get to debate white men.
Nonwhites just need to be told to set their inferior assess aside. They need to be told they don’t get to address white men under any circumstances accept to say “Yes, Sir.”
The reply, “Yes, Master”, is even better.
#2 by kane on 10/06/2006 - 1:41 pm
NOT SPAM
Unfortantely, the supreme court rulled against separate but equal and the military was brought in to enforce that. Maybe they have more power in the modern era, with judges legislating from the bench. Nothing punishes a supreme court judge who doesn’t follow the consitution, you are supposed to just trust them…yeah right!
#3 by Alan B. on 10/06/2006 - 2:16 pm
NOT SPAM
Some presidents will abuse the checks and balances in a perverse manner to get the desired result. When they lost a case, they looked at it as a victory, thats what they wanted all along, a challenge, an enemy, boogie man.
#4 by Shari on 10/06/2006 - 9:15 pm
Not Spam
Boy, I guess call the undertaker. Every 1960’s social experiment is a HUGH failure. Ruth Bader and the rest just can’t hold up. What law can they refer to, when law has been gutted, and the experiments are failures? A house built on sand and all that.
#5 by Shari on 10/06/2006 - 9:24 pm
Not Spam
It looks as if the elite class hopes to have a world government in place and ready to go but that is looking pretty dicey too. Bigger house built on sand.
#6 by mderpelding on 10/06/2006 - 9:52 pm
NOT SPAM
NOT SPAM
You say that in 1834 the courts ruled for the Indians.
So the courts were wordist.
In 1834.
Worshipping the “Holy Constituition” I’ll bet.
BILL OF RIGHTS?
More words.
Today in the military,
recruits promise to “defend the constituition”.
We no longer question this.
We are agreeing to self destruct for somebodies WORDS.
Whose words?
Nobody knows.
Whatever sounds the best.
You decide.
Got some NEW words?
We’ll die for those instead.
As I recall, in D.C. there is a big marble
building that serves as a shrine for the
american holy words.
Set up like the old Hebrew temple complete
with the Holy of Holies shrine.
All “Loyal Americans” are urged to make the
D.C. pilgramage to view the Holy words.
Another Mecca.
#7 by Al Parker on 10/07/2006 - 12:02 am
NOT SPAM
I was watching the National Organization of Women (NOW) conference one night on C-SPAN. The conference was composed of elderly, haggish women and heavy set and generally homely women. One of these unattractive women spoke about a woman’s right to avoid unwanted pregnancies. She suggested that there ought to be legal recourse against such a pregnancy — that a fetus could be considered a parasite invading the body; an intruder. It later occurred to me that the women who rail the loudest against unwanted preganancy are the least likely to encounter such a circumstance.
#8 by Alan B. on 10/07/2006 - 12:53 am
I guess you can say the supreme court tried to do its job in th eearly years and the “great presidents” not capitolized, brow beat them and this happened alot, Roosevelt did this to and eventually choose political hacks to sit on the bench. No we have had a court that rules in what ever manner it feels is politically correct and many want to go back to the past when it interpeted the constition, damned if you do, damned if you do you could say in regards to this court.
#9 by Alan B. on 10/08/2006 - 10:57 pm
NOT SPAM
C-span had N.O.W. on there, I could’nt immagine watching the gaggle of old lerftist Jewish hags for a second.