When I was on Capitol Hill, the Capitol Hill Police Force had about 1100 officers. This armed force protected about one hundred and sixty acres of territory.
Mayor Blumberg of New York has just given a hundred million dollars to fight for gun control. Needless to say, he has a large contingent of armed guards around him at all times.
Any member of the congress or the legislature who wants a gun permit can get one.
I remember when Alan Dershowitz, famous for defending Free Speech was on a talk show. His opponent said he was consistently on the side of the criminal. Dershowitz answered, “You had better put your house in your wife’s name before you say that.” He shut the other guy up with bullying him. Only rich people could afford to be sure he was not right.
One in every hundred men, women and children in this country is a lawyer. Our society has what any earlier generations of Americans would have considered a state of at least semi-despotism.
National Review and other respectable conservatives are STILL asking why academia is leftist. I explained that in my 1976 book, which the NR review recommended. Under Marxism “intellectuals” rule the world. If you know that you can either understand why academia likes this idea or you are simply hopeless.
The more lawyers anything requires the more powerful those who have them become. Meanwhile, for the average person, a lawyer is a ruinous expense.
So the very rich favor more regulations. Those regulations are despotic to others, but they have lawyers and politicians at their beck and call. So the very rich are for more regulations, or at least they couldn’t care less about them.
Another interesting aspect of our society is that billionaires bully millionaires. For a millionaire today, when millions are merely upper middle class, the cost of regulations is devastating. They have to pay lawyers by the hour, instead of owning a few dozen like a billionaire does.
This is the sort of observation any intelligent person, much less any “pro,” does not need explained.
All this seems obvious to me, but respectable conservatives will never know it.
#1 by Old King Cole on 06/24/2013 - 6:52 am
You are trapped in a room with a man-eating tiger, a wild alligator, and a lawyer. You have a gun with two bullets… what do you do?
Shoot the lawyer twice.
#2 by Bob on 06/24/2013 - 9:17 am
Don’t forget to check his pulse.
#3 by Dave on 06/24/2013 - 10:14 am
Respectables have a hard time grasping the intersection of law and politics.
It’s like a friend of mine who hired a contractor to build a beautiful custom designed waterfront home only to receive huge fines from the city a couple of years later for failure to procure the necessary development permits, which by contract, the contractor was bound to do.
So he hired a lawyer who sent out the usual notice of intent to sue to the contractor and made an appointment the following Monday to conference with his lawyer face-to-face about “next steps” in the case. When he arrived at his lawyer’s office on that Monday, he found his lawyer bound to the chair in his office with ropes, brutally pistol whipped, and half dead through dehydration. There was also a note pinned to his lawyer’s chest: “Your family is next.”
Right then and there my friend decided to withdraw from the case.
Like I said, “Respectables” have a hard time grasping the intersection of law and politics.
#4 by Bob on 06/24/2013 - 10:23 am
Ole King Cole,
Be sure to check his pulse.
#5 by Simon on 06/25/2013 - 7:54 am
Exposure to direct sunlight also works.
#6 by Jason on 06/25/2013 - 8:06 am
There was once a small town that had no need of a lawyer and yet a new lawyer moved in. There wasn’t enough work for even one lawyer like him alone, so he came up with a solution.
He invited another lawyer to move in. Soon, they both had plenty of business.
#7 by jo3w on 06/25/2013 - 10:54 am
My next door neighbor is a lawyer and an Obama supporter. I don’t hold back with him at all, I talk about white genocide and all the other stuff we talk about on here. I bought him a copy of “why Johnny can’t think” and he actually read the whole thing. He is surprisingly receptive to our ideas. Maybe that’s some evidence that public opinion is shifting? When our ideas are presented correctly it is easy to see that there is no hate in it, and I point that out as much as I can.
#8 by OldBlighty on 06/25/2013 - 1:41 pm
Perhaps he’s figured out how much money could be made with White Genocide lawsuits? 🙂
#9 by Jason on 06/25/2013 - 2:50 pm
Good luck. I’m not a fan of one-on-one attempts to change people anymore. I used to try it long ago, but it seems like people seldom change. I’ve never known an anti-White to be argued back to loyalty. I suspect because they are traitors at heart. But maybe I’m not that persuasive!
Everyone I know who is pro-White today has always had the seeds of it in them. And I grew up in an age of utter Pod People.
#10 by Jason on 06/25/2013 - 4:56 pm
I did use this line talking to someone recently about Snowden going to Russia. I said:
“Well, at least Putin doesn’t hate guys that look like me”. My friend was taken aback and didn’t know what to say.
#11 by Jason on 06/25/2013 - 9:04 pm
Sorry to post again, but Bob asked us about responses from talking to family and friends and using our terminology.
I notice reluctance by some to say they are loyal to our race (even though they are basically pro-White). The concept of racial loyalty seems to bother them. They will point out Whites they don’t like, or lowlife criminal Whites and say they don’t feel loyalty to them, that sort of thing. They seem to see bristle at it as a form of socialism that will take from them and give to some sponge.
And also, they often have highest loyalty to some religion or “set of principles”.
#12 by jo3w on 06/25/2013 - 9:05 pm
I agree, getting an anti-White to convert is a low percentage shot. My goal is to make them realize that opposing me will be embarrasing for them. Every anti-White who has to stoop to name calling to defend thier ideas is either too dumb to be a threat or embarrased at thier inability to mount an effective argument. That anti-White will think twice before he puts up resistance in the future. For gods sake dont stop engaging them, it is good practice for when we will be confronting them publically. Dont even bother trying to convert , just demoralize with a friendly smile.
#13 by Jason on 06/25/2013 - 9:14 pm
Good point and thanks for the reminder. I actually did demoralize an ex-coworker today by referring to him as anti-White. He vanished after I said.