THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

OUR RELATIONS WITH OTHER HERETICS | 2002-07-13

I freely allow those who are labeled extremists to reprint my material. I am not worried if Ronald Reagan got the endorsement of some Klan groups and liberal candidates get the endorsement of some Communist groups. As long as THEY reprint what ****I**** say, I welcome the help.

In George Orwell's book "1984," it turns out that the whole hideous totalitarianism that crushed the hero is based on ending one simple, useless-sounding freedom: "Freedom," it says, "is the right to say that 1 plus 1 equals 2."

It is obvious to me that for a black buck to have a blond girl and produce more ugly brown children is wrong. But liberals and respectable conservatives agree that to say this makes me a NAZI! It also made Harry Truman and Douglas MacArthur NAZIS, according to today's respectable conservatives.

It is time to take on the "NAZI!" tactic without compromise.

What makes respectable conservatives harmless is that liberals pick the people THEY want to call" respectable." The liberal media allow the harmless ones, harmless because they are dumb and cowardly, to get media exposure. Liberals are not going to allow those anti-liberals on their media who make liberals feel threatened.

That's how the real world works.

For many decades I have been yelled at by respectable conservatives and liberals, screaming, "If you are a heretic on race, you are a NAZI!!!"

For anyone with ANY male hormones, there is a hurting wish to scream, "OK, damn you, I'm a Nazi!!!" Many of us have yielded to that natural tendency. But the simple fact remains that I am NOT a Nazi. Truman was not a Nazi. MacArthur was not a Nazi.

When you let them make you react that way, you are yielding to their Orwellian tactic.

If there were a real dictatorship in America, I would bet anything that most of the "extremists" would be in the life-and-death resistance to it. I know for sure that the best COLLABORATORS would be RESPECTABLE CONSERVATIVES.

Collaboration is how you get the "respectable" label in the frist place.

What Orwell concluded, "Freedom is the right to say 1 plus 1 is 2," is very American. European "democracies" send people to PRISON for heresy on the race issue. They call that Freedom, a capitalized virtue. But Americans are interested in freedom, which is simply the right to say what you damn well please, and a willingness to fight for that right, a battle which no respectable conservative will wage.

As long as "respectable" means "coward," a lot of good people will go with the leftist's Orwellian "Nazi" tactic. I want the good people who have fallen for the enemy tactic to come back. I want them to join those of us who fight for freedom and who care about our race.

If everybody on the right refuses to care about the very survival of our race, we are going to lose everybody with courage to the swastika or the Klan. People are going to find leaders, even if they have to be called Nazis to do it.

There are a lot of really evil people in extremist groups. But what counts is those who have been driven to those groups by the Orwellian left AND by despair with respectable conservatism. It is not necessary to drive good people to that extreme.

AFKAN THE LUV CULT, AND FAIRY CAKE | 2008-06-15

While "thinking outside the box" has become a tiresome establishment phrase, we in BUGS DO have a different window on the world. As was said in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, a powerful mind can deduce the whole universe from a piece of fairy cake.

You cannot deduce the whole world by sticking with today's news headlines.

From my discussion of "The Luv Cult" went on to make a short and concise piece explaining generational changes, the attitude of so-call "Christians" and race in the Old Testament.

I do not so much take issue with what he says as I EXPAND on it.

AFKAN is right that a fundamental change took place in the Counter- or, as he correctly describes it, the NON-Culture of the 1960s.

But, as I said, this Luv Cult is a JOINT effort of BOTH the anti-culture AND the Traditional Values crowd.

Until 1948 South Carolina was the last state in our Regrettable Union to forbid divorce FOR ANY REASON WHATEVER. This was in the name of Traditional Values. In our less gullible terms it said that, once a guy in a dress said the WORDS, the State sanctified them forever.

The latest poll shows 30% of Americans now agree with that old South Carolina view, and that is the lowest percentage EVER. Traditional Values people emphasize the absolute importance of the WORDS and the guy in the dress, which in my case also means the preacher or JP in the coat and tie, beside whose authority children's genes mean nothing.

"Modern" types agree the children's genes mean nothing, but they say all that mattes if the emotional state the parents are in at the time. Just as a powerful mind can deduce the universe from a piece of fairy cake, we can deduce the reason our society gets so SILLY from this joint view of "both sides" in our political-cultural debate from this Luv Cult-Maninadress bit.

There is an awfully lot to be considered in the decision to bring children into the world and "both sides" in our mainline debate absolutely refuse to deal with it for the silliest of reasons.

ORRIN STILL LOVES TEDDY | 2000-07-01

Poor John McCain had to disappoint his liberal admirers during the South Carolina primary when he had to back down on his words condemning the Confederate flag as "a symbol of slavery and oppression." Fortunately, he was able to repeat that condemnation AFTER the primary, making him and the media happy. Because he admitted that had used an outright lie on purpose, the media was able to declare him a man of perfect honesty.

In the August 14, 1999, Whitaker Online, "Orrin Loves Teddy," I pointed out the fact that Orrin Hatch, as Senate Judiciary Chairman, worships his Democratic vice chairman, Teddy Kennedy. He even writes poems to him.

Kennedy offered an amendment to begin the federalization of criminal law in the name of "hate crimes." We all know that once the Feds are able to prosecute any case they decide to call "hate," the old primacy

of states in criminal prosecution will be totally gone.

Facing his hero's outrageous "hate crime" bill, poor Orrin had McCain's problem. He couldn't hold his political followers and back Kennedy's bill. So he offered a compromise which passed 50-49. That broke the solid conservative front against the very idea of federalizing criminal law in the name of "hate crimes." As a result, Kennedy's bill then passed the Senate 57-42.

This is the old leftist "two steps forward, one step back" approach. A liberal demands that total federalization begin in the name of fighting racism. Then, a conservative who desperately wants liberal approval, and who would rather shoot his children than be called a racist, offers a compromise. So the liberal agenda asks for two steps and is given one. Eventually, the liberal gets it all, and more.

A liberal-worshiper like Hatch or McCain is worth more to the left than an outright liberal like Kennedy.

BUSH IS NOT A PSYCHOPATH | 2006-08-22

I have often said that Bill Clintonishte perfect example of a psychopath. I have been asked if Bush is one.

I did not answer, not becuase I don't know the answer, but because I am desperately weary of explaining that just because I give somebody credit for something, it does not mean that I am endorsing them.

I know that Churchill was a good speaker, but I hate that bastard more than any other single person in history. He took baths regularly, and I am silling to admit it, but that does not mean I love him.

So if I say Bush is not a psychopath, I will get a retort about how the person I am talking to thinks Bush is awful and I am saying he is nice.

Actually I think Bush will have a worse time at Judgement than Bill Clinton or Ted Bundy will. ZThe Catholic Church actually has a dotrine called Invincible Ignorance, where a person is INCAPABLE of understanding that some things are wrong. A psychopath, like a child, is a moral innocent.

So let me tell you why I know Bush is not a psychopath.

I watched him the first time that his orders actually led to a couple of soldiers being killed. He was shaken when he went to the press conference, thought he tried not to show it.

Ther is a particular reaction in a person who gets shot at personally. That is, not when the general exchange of bullets and explosions of shrapnel are occurring, but when someone shoots at HIM, personally. The most battle-hardened et is shaken by that experience the first time.

It is the same when you know that YOUR orders led to soebody actually getting killed. Neither reaction makes sense.

If you have been putting yourself in firefights, someone is going to eventually shoot at YOU. If you are constantly giving orders to people to go in armed, somebody will eventually get killed. So neither emotion makes any sense at all.

Emotions do not make sense.

Clinton could send a division in to certain death and he would wail and cry at the press conference, but I could tell it was a show. Bush was shaken at two deaths at his orders.

No, Bush is not a psychopath. His evil is genuinely, PERSONALLY evil.