I’ll take mine medium
In the little bet we have going, my colleague perhaps shows his youth by pitting Hillary against (any x such that x is not Hillary). Considering the scope that x can range over, this seems like a pretty good bet for me to have taken, even if Hillary were the lead horse. I don’t know whom our rulers have chosen to be the next President, but just the raw odds made it too hard to turn down. And yes, I’ll take mine medium, at the Main Street Cafe please.
Let’s go through the strengths and weaknesses of each candidate, from the standpoint of why the Cryptocracy might be for or against each one.
Hillary
The purpose of a Hillary presidency would be to demoralize the American people, making them feel even more helpless and impotent. Hillary was repudiated more than Bill in the 1994 election, on account of the fear of Hillary-care. It would be kind of an “in your face” for her to be put into the presidency. A demoralized people is a more easily controlled people, and this would certainly be attractive to the cryptocracy.
On the negative side, though, I don’t think she is reliable enough for our rulers: they may fear she could not be controlled. She is not exactly the Iron Lady. Hillary is prone to temper tantrums, and let’s also not forget the eternal “hell hath no fury.” Our rulers need someone that will send troops to stomp on little third world countries at their command, but not go into a rage and push the little red button. Like the Godfather said, “I want someone reliable, someone that won’t get carried away. After all, we are not murderers… despite what this undertaker says.”
Obama
The pro-side is exactly the same as Hillary’s: humiliation. I honestly don’t think America is ready for a Negro President with a name that sounds like a Middle East terrorist; it would be almost as humiliating as having a woman as commandette-in-chief. You can say “race shouldn’t matter” until you’re blue in the face; at the end of the day, race does matter to millions of people.
The negative side might not be as bad as Hillary, but there would be a bit of the same dynamic. Whenever you have someone with a background that puts a chip on his shoulder, that primes the pump to always need to prove himself, without military experience, and no dynastic network to lend stability, there is something uncontrollable that would scare our beloved rulers.
The Democratic ticket
Though I am pretty sure the outcome of the national election is rigged at the key and decisive points, the Cryptocracy also knows they can’t buck popular opinion beyond a certain point. (This is why some opinion polls and even some elections are not completely without due effect.) In my experience, Hillary does not have a wide base of appeal even among women. And since the Negro vote is already locked by the Democrats anyhow, there is no outward political advantage whatsoever to having Obama on the ticket.
I do think that, if they really want Hillary, the way to get her there would be as the VP candidate, followed by an assassination of the President after the election. I was explaining this possibility to my seminary carpool mates when one of them exclaimed that there is a TV show based on exactly that premise. That makes me think they are really keeping that open as a possibility.
Moreover, it could be that they could solve the “control” problem merely by the threat of this. This possibility makes me think that an Obama/Hillary ticket might have real merit. Then, after the election, the word would be sent over to the White House, “Hey Bambo buddy, remember that little TV show? Amazing how everything has been following that script, no? Now do you believe that we’re in charge? Just do what we say, and we promise it won’t turn out that way.”
The Republican ticket
While the last scenario does seem possible, I’m thinking that the Cryptocracy will still favor another good ole’ reliable Republican, especially as it seems like continuing the perpetual warfare against the peasants of the world seems to be their highest priority for a while longer, and this has always been the Republican specialty.
In that case, the threat of the Bitch and Negro ticket is simply bait to put the Christian Right and the other Red Staters into a blind panic, so they will fall in line and not ask any questions. Sean Hannity has already dropped right into the groove. The B&N are like a tin rabbit on a track, whose job is to whip the dogs into a frenzy and complete the race.
Giuliani
Giuliani would be a perfect President for the Cryptocracy. He went along with the Eleven like a glove fitting a hand, like he was cut out just for that job. There is no question that he would continue the neo-cons’ military rampage through the Middle East. And more than any candidate out there except McCain, he would get along fine with the military — he has that exuberant and confident demeanor, tempered by self-deprecating humor which, even if it is not genuine, fills out the personality mix that military men appreciate. Not to mention, the race and sex that the military brass still undoubtedly trust instinctively.
The Right Wing, especially the Christian part of it, will hush up about his skirt-chasing, his favoring of fag marriage and of a woman’s right to burn pre-born babies to death with saline solution, his opposition to a man’s right to defend himself, and so forth. He got the cops beating up on bums and beggars in New York again — what more do you want?!
Well… the “cops” will soon be coming for you, too.
Mitch Romney
This is a man that belongs to a religion that teaches that “Heavenly Father” — who is but one of a virtually infinite number of similar gods –, with his gaggle of cosmic babes, sired his son; indeed, several sons. Well, actually: a few billion sons and daughters.
I’m sorry: this is a repulsive, Satan-worshipping cult, and a scrubbed and smiling face and fresh-pressed Oxford shirt does not change that fact.
Sean Hannity is disgusted that any “man of faith” would be challenged. But this is to reduce the concept of faith to Mark Twain’s definition — believing what you know is not true.
Would Sean find a candidate acceptable that, like Aeneas, wanted to rally our nation in piety toward Venus, and under her protection, achieve victory over the nations that serve Juno? Mormonism is far more absurd than that!
I’ll tell you the truth: I would rather have a Muhammedan as President than a Mormon. At least there is a little bit of metaphysical dignity.
(Sean: will you join me in supporting such a one as a “man of faith”?)
The humiliation of America continues apace in both the “left” and the “right” versions.
McCain
Don’t discount McCain entirely, despite his current struggles. He could well be fingered as the Secretariat that will lunge to the front in the stretch, especially if Giuliani stumbles.
He would be utterly reliable for the Cryptocracy; and with his nonsensical campaign-finance ideas, would set the stage beautifully and obediently for his own Party’s demise, if the following election cycle (eight years later) were designated to swing back to the Democrats.
Conclusion
Or, there might be someone not yet on the radar screen.
The radar screen is itself part of the act.
If my colleague had forced me to put my steak on a single candidate to match his choice, it would be Giuliani. He has surged in the polls, just like the unknown W was doing back in ‘99. Only, the puff-machine has kept Giuliani in the limelight continually since the Eleven so that his surge has a credibility to it that W’s never did.
Like my colleague opined, it doesn’t really matter.
Of course it does matter; just not in this way.
There is still hope, but that hope has nothing to do with going behind a curtain next year and pulling a lever next to the name of one of these buffoons. I expect to spend more time agonizing over which cut of steak to order at MB’s expense.
I still think it’s gonna be Gore v. Giuliani. Gore will be hailed as savior of the Democratic Party when neither Hillary nor Obama manages to become a clear-cut frontrunner. Futhermore, Gore will have much the same polarizing effect as Hillary, considering both his ties to Clinton and his “Global Warming” screeds. Obama might be the VP candidate so that he can be groomed/trained for future service.
I do agree NINEELEVEN that Giuliani will NINEELEVEN end up winning NINEELEVEN the Republican NINEELEVEN nomination and go on to NINEELEVEN be elected president NINEELEVEN because of his NINEELEVEN “experience.”
Comment by Mocheirge — May 28, 2007 @ 4:47 pm
Hillary is going to win, but the Republican contenders are interesting. Since names are important here is my analysis of how presidential-sounding the contenders are.
Rudy Giuliani – sounds like the head of a New York crime family (and he practically is)
John McCain – presidential sounding; 15 Presidents have had a last name ending with ‘n’
Newt Gingrich – this name sounds like an amphibian character from a Dr. Seuss story
Fred Thompson – presidential last name, but the first name will do him in
Mitt Romney – sounds like a washed-up heavy weight boxer who has been hitting the booze
Sam Brownback – this one is too easy
Mike Huckabee – I can almost hear “Dueling Banjos” in the background
Tom Tancredo – reverse problem of Fred Thompson; good first name, mafioso sounding last
Jim Gilmore – not bad; close to Filmore (#13) and James is definitely presidential
Duncan Hunter – sounds macho and effeminate at the same time (Duncan Hines) and so sends a mixed message; will only get the fag vote
Ron Paul – sounds patriotic (John Paul Jones), but not enough syllables (George Bush I and II are exceptions to this rule) and two first names don’t work
Tommy Thompson – one Tom too many
John McCain and Jim Gilmore are the most presidential sounding. But this is the only thing Gilmore has going for him. This leaves McCain. Add to this the qualities my colleague mentioned and you have your winner. Thus it will be McCain vs. Hillary with Hillary taking the prize.
Comment by MRB — May 30, 2007 @ 5:46 pm
MRB, That last comment had me laughing out loud - thanks
Comment by secret agent +J(o)>S~H** — May 31, 2007 @ 12:06 am
Thanks for a very entertaining post!
Comment by ElizaF — May 31, 2007 @ 12:37 pm
Seriously, MB may have a point about the names. It occurred to me how many Hollywood actors changed their names when launching their careers. I don’t have a statistic, but anyone that surfs IMdB very much knows that it is a startlingly high percentage. That crowd at least, so dependent on popularity for their prosperity, has for many decades felt that there is a correlation between the sound of a name and popularity.
Comment by TJH — June 1, 2007 @ 12:34 pm
Just one more good column which validates my belief in Monarchial Theocracy as the form of governance which our God intended to rule over men.
Democracy is mob rule from the pit of hell, and when the mob are all lazy, stupid, immoral, and generally apathetic or hostile to the Kingship claims of Christ, then the wicked will have carte blanche to rule by deceiving the masses with their pretty words and vapid promises.
BTW — have YOU been praying for the grace of martyrdom? You better, because if you can’t see the persecution coming in America in the next 20 to 40 years (aside from a miracle of en masse conversion to true Christianity in this country) then you are a complete idiot.
Brother Ed
Comment by Edward Hara — June 3, 2007 @ 2:21 pm
One defect in this essay is that I lapsed into an objective attack against Mitt Romney, losing thereby the perspective of our rulers’ view which was the task of the piece. It would have been better style to make that point as a separate piece.
But the conclusion is still there: it will be as if to say to us, “you Christians, you think your voice is important? We’ll get you to rally around a guy that serves a science fiction god; and we’ll even get you to call it ‘faith.’”
Comment by TJH — June 6, 2007 @ 6:41 am
Ed, since the fall God’s prescribed form of government is presbyterian theonomic theocracy as seen under Moses. Ironically, God specifically told Samuel that the people’s desire for an earthly monarch (or pope) was a rejection of Him. You are correct to shun pure democracy, but you should do the same with popish monarchialism.
Comment by GV — June 6, 2007 @ 11:32 pm
My new choice for the Republican nomination is Fred Thompson.
1) The rest of the candidates are languishing because they all look liberal next to Ron Paul. The same is true of Fred, but since he voted against the wetback amnesty bill, he will be viewed as a Republican messiah.
2) He picked up the fund-raising guru that McCain thought he had secured. This means lots of money.
3) Fred has made his pilgrimage to Jerusalem to court the holy ones and has been vetted as the candidate most supportive of Israel. This means he will be happy to murder and torture Arabs and Persians and cover Israeli war crimes when they raze the West Bank and Gaza.
I think we have our Republican candidate.
Comment by MRB — June 8, 2007 @ 7:25 pm
4) He is an actor. Actors are good at reading the lines they are given. Actors are good at lying, since they are well-practiced in simulation.
Comment by TJH — June 9, 2007 @ 9:49 am
Good news for your pony du jour:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-poll12jun12,0,6280343.story
I’d tack on to your FT thesis that Americans in general and Republicans/conservatives particularly, seem to have a fondness for actors (consider Reagan, the Terminator, and the Body).
I’d slightly discount your actor/liar connection, because of the similar lawyer/liar link for much the same sort of reason - they are comfortable expressing opinions that are not their own.
Perhaps actors are better at it, and I’m open to that possibility. What do you think?
Perhaps an Edwards/FT showdown would settle the matter.
-Turretinfan
P.S. I’m using “liar” liberally here, and I’d rather not debate the squadron of lawyers who realize that my usage here is a bit imprecise.
Comment by TurretinFan — June 12, 2007 @ 12:23 pm
Of course Ron Paul the Magnificent was intentionally left off my list.
He is the first candidate since George Wallace that we can confidently say is not controlled by the cryptocracy. But a couple of objections may need to be answered:
1. He is a Republican, and the Republican Party is evil.
Both points granted, but he is so in name only; he is a true RINO. The pro-big-government people that callers-in to Sean Hannity mention as RINOs are not that at all; they are, indeed, archetypal Republicans.
2. He is a libertarian, and libertarianism is unbiblical.
A strict constructionist (i.e. honest) approach to the Constitution will always look libertarian formally, in respect to national/state issues. And it is a national office he is running for. It is inconceivable that he would “impose” libertarianism on the states.
Now is the time to send a hundred or two (or more) to Ron Paul’s campaign. Go here and then find the link for making a donation.
Comment by TJH — July 9, 2007 @ 1:22 pm
I can’t understand why they haven’t assassinated this guy yet. Mark my words, if finds a voice on the main stream media, he will be assassinated.
Comment by TJH — August 6, 2007 @ 9:15 pm
His interview on Fox was the extent of his finding a way into main stream media. FW is fond of the term “cryptocracy”. Such a term applies to the main line media powers as well.
Comment by Joshua — August 7, 2007 @ 12:04 am
Here is brief reminder of who the most important constituency is for all the candidates except Ron Paul.
Comment by TJH — August 16, 2007 @ 11:23 am
Compare comment #2, then this washington post editorial by Monica Hesse.
Could it be that the Post would plagiarize our lowly little site?
Comment by TJH — September 5, 2007 @ 4:43 pm
Everyone should study this sick letter from neo-con Michael Medved to Ron Paul. If there was ever proof that kikes need to be thrown overboard as one step to our national renewal, ESPECIALLY THE ONES MASQUERADING AS CONSERVATIVES, it is this one.
If you have winamp, listen to this impassioned response from Stormfront’s Jamie Kelso. If his claims are true — and I have no reason to doubt it — then Medved is not only a traitor, but an arrant liar as well.
Comment by Tim H — October 31, 2007 @ 9:09 pm
TJH,
I read that piece of trash the other day. Typical move by kike-media. Perpaps Paul is becoming a threat. He had a good showing on Leno the other day http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0KwY9Uzqtk . As if a candidate had to repudiate or affirm the beleiefs of all “enthusiastic” supporters.
I thought your offsite comeback was sharp about Giuliani’s Tamudic followers.
Comment by Joshua — November 1, 2007 @ 4:17 pm
I’m still betting on Hillary, but this “news” offers some support for my colleague’s position.
“Judeo-Christian” frontman, Pat Robertson, endorses the cross-dresser for President.
Michael Hoffman explains the reasons:
“(1) Giuliani is the #1 preferred candidate for the Presidency among Orthodox rabbis and militant Zionists.
“(2) Giuliani is a degenerate, a serial adulterer and abortionist.”
Notice that Hoffman asserts that Robertson is endorsing the cross-dresser not despite these facts, but because of them.
Robertson, unlike Falwell and Graham, has always been a fraud. Falwell and Graham started out legit, but prostituted themselves later in life. Robertson has always been a whore. And that is the charitable reading. More likely, Robertson is a mole that has been planted into evangelicalism to lead the sheep into destruction.
Comment by MRB — November 7, 2007 @ 5:42 pm
a crypto-jew
Comment by Joshua — November 7, 2007 @ 9:51 pm
Michael Hoffman (see link at #19 above for his web site) says that this is Pat Robertson’s god. An interesting exercise is to try to unpack what he means by this.
Comment by MRB — November 10, 2007 @ 11:07 pm
“Once the audience had been effectively hypnotized, once its judgment and willpower had been weakened, the real sales pitch could begin…”
John H. Towsen, Clowns
Comment by Joshua — November 16, 2007 @ 12:22 am
Interesting peace
on Huckabee’s (false?) claim to holding a “theology degree”. Turns out, even though even he took several hours at a Baptist seminary, he is unable to tell whether Mormonism is a cult or religion.
Comment by Joshua — December 18, 2007 @ 5:58 pm
About 7:55 in to his Larry King interview, Presidential Candidate Mike Huckabee is asked, “What part if any should religion pay in a Presidential race? Listen for yourself. I can only say that Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, TX didn’t teach Van Til in their apologetics classes.
At the end of the this segment you will also hear him apologize for his evil statement/question, “Don’t Mormons believe that Jesus and the devil are brothers?”
There are other video segments but you can read the transcript here.
Other highlights include:
1) his statement, “I’m tough on crime,” a reference to his being for capital punishment–though he pardoned 12 murderers, and allows ‘gays’ to work for him.
2) Brags on sending all his kids through K-13 public schools, but doesn’t believe in evolution, nor does he want to interfer with the curriculum: “I don’t get into that. I’m not a science teacher.”
3) Another Van Tillian moment, in refernece to the First Amendment: “[T]he basic concept of the First Amendment is that you neither prefer one religion over another or prohibit one.”
Comment by Joshua — December 21, 2007 @ 10:04 pm
Huckabee to speak at Hagee’s church.
Comment by Joshua — December 22, 2007 @ 8:47 am
It’s like pulling hens’ teeth to find the actual Iowa poll results succinctly stated without comment. Finally I found this at the NY Times.
Democrats
Obama 38%
Edwards 30%
Clinton 29%
Republicans
Huckabee 34%
Romney 25%
Thompson 13%
McCain 13%
Paul 10%
Giuliani 3%
What is interesting is that if Yo-mama and the Huckster really did emerge as the candidates, then there would be virtually no cross-over voting in the final election: it would be pure Republican vs Democrat. So that is what makes this result a little bit interesting, coming from a state where voters still have a little bit of basic integrity.
Of course, no one believes that it will be those two when the dust settles.
What we are training ourselves to do is to read these little results in terms of the cryptocracy’s game plan. It is like watching a Risk game played by one or two masters along with a few beginners. The Huckster has built up a little army, and thinks he can “take Asia.” His actual role from the Masters’ perspective is to neutralize the real threat from Ron Paul. As long as he is “taking” the right color armies, they will give him just enough media attention and poll results to stay alive. If he can gobble up enough Paul armies to remove that threat, he will have done well, and will get a pat on the back and an “atta boy” before he is in turn decimated.
The good news is that though Paul placed fifth, in a statistical sense one could almost say that Huck and the Mormon tied for first, while Paul, the Law-and-Order guy, and the POW tied for third. Thus, Paul could easily break out into the #3 spot. Huckabee will fade fast in the blue states — not because he is conservative (which he isn’t) but because he comes across like a religious hick.
Meanwhile, the agenda of Fox will have to become clear to more people if they include Giuli in their debate but exclude Paul.
Comment by TJH — January 4, 2008 @ 10:53 am
Forgive me for behaving like Doug Wilson by quoting myself, but I cannot resist. This from comment #2 above:
“John McCain and Jim Gilmore are the most presidential sounding. But this is the only thing Gilmore has going for him. This leaves McCain. Add to this the qualities my colleague mentioned and you have your winner. Thus it will be McCain vs. Hillary with Hillary taking the prize.”
With the Mormon effectively dropping out, McCain has the Republican nomination tied up.
Of course there is still some drama to be played out between the skirt and the Mulatto, but the script has already been written. Hillary will take it.
Thus McCain vs. Clinton and Clinton will win. Both the Cryptocracy and I will be happy. They will have their man and I will have my steak
Comment by MRB — February 7, 2008 @ 8:59 pm
NPR, based on a passing remark by Hillary, is now speaking of a Dem ticket including both her and Yomama, the only question being which is to be on top. If Yomama is fingered for the top spot, watch for either a new war for Israel or an assassination.
Comment by TJH — March 5, 2008 @ 11:29 am
Bon apetit! (or is it too early to decide the bet?)
Comment by TurretinFan — June 4, 2008 @ 6:56 am
Yes, it looks like Obama has it. . . now. But there may be a surprise or two before the end.
Comment by MRB — June 4, 2008 @ 9:18 am
What do you bet Obama picks Jim Webb (Republican turned Democrat) Senator from Virginia as VP?
Comment by ElizaF — June 5, 2008 @ 6:40 am
Eliza -
Since it looks as though I got burned by Hillary, I think my betting days are over.
Comment by MRB — June 5, 2008 @ 10:41 am
Well, Hillary could still be the designee of the cryptocracy, along the lines that I outlined above. However, I don’t think they wd assassinate Yomama right away — they wd use the threat thereof to get him to be a compliant puppet for as long as possible. As odd as it sounds, Yomama could actually end up being as close to a clone of the W for 8 years as one cd imagine.
If he does pick Webb for VP, I wd take that as a sign that McCain has been given the nod to “win.” Despite his obligatory liberal stances on this or that, Webb has a strong racial sense, or at least memory, and would not at all be reliable for the cryptocracy. Then again, you might suggest the plan would be to assassinate Webb, but what wd that really accomplish for them? Precious little that I can think of, unless it wd be to prove to Yomama how serious the threat is.
On the other hand, if McCain were to pick a young Ron Paul type (if there are any), someone who was neutral toward Israel, then for sure that is a sign that Yomama is the designee.
Now if McCain did that AND Yomama picked Webb, that would be a toughie to read. But I’m not expecting that’s possible.
Of course more likely neither of those situations will come to pass, so we have to keep guessing to a large extent.
Comment by TJH — June 6, 2008 @ 7:48 am
But I think Hillary is the most likely VP for Yomama. Now the question is, if Y is assassinated before the election, and Hillary inherits, does that count for MB winning the bet?
Comment by TJH — June 6, 2008 @ 11:32 am
I would like to suggest that Jimmy Carter was the last mistake the cryptocracy made and they will never make another one.
Assassination is out of the question, in my mind, for a candidate that is the definition of orthodoxy. Obama will fall in line on the jews if he isn’t already in line enough.
I can see assassination as a psychological operation against the American people but I don’t see to what end the murderous means would be carried out. What would it accomplish?
Comment by danielj — June 6, 2008 @ 7:51 pm
Reading through the blog again, I started thinking about what would happen if Obama really was assassinated (in an Obama/Hillary reality.)
“They” would have all the benefits that Tim listed of a Hillary administration, with an added bonus:
Every black, and black loving American would systematically route out anyone with (what will be classified as) a hostile worldview. (Afterall, it was a racist white man holding on to antiquated religious views that pulled the trigger!)
That means, no more First Word, and the frail support offered to us “extreme Christians” would quickly wither away; becoming socially un-acceptable in any circumstance.
Maybe the “Zeitgeist” of America would officially shift to that of total statism, while evangelicalism is made completely taboo; something even a mother wouldn’t support of her son.
I could only hope that such a persecution would force the evangellyfish out there, to marry their politics with their theology, and stand up for themselves.
It would of course be a completely novel concept for them, so they would cast about for some political movement to latch hold of…which is where good ol’ Ron Paul comes in.
Oh how I love optimism, and the God who makes it possible!
Comment by Scott — June 8, 2008 @ 8:16 am
Daniel — I wd say first, that no one is 100% reliable. And second, for people of the cryptocratic world, death is the supreme evil. Therefore, assassination or its threat is, I am quite sure, an ongoing aspect of their world.
The assassination of Yo would have many effects salutory for the cryptocracy. Getting their girl Hillary into power would only be the least. The biggest prize would undoubtedly be to shame the whites into abject collective guilt and humiliation, as was done after the assassination of JFK, thus softening them up for yet another round of racial suicide via immigration, amnesty, and entitlements.
Scott — it’s a nice thought; but you have to realize that the evangellyfish are asking for the very situation that will lead to their permanent silencing. I am not at all sure that anything short of being marched off to concentration camps would make them rethink their premises. Even that might not. They will probably be the ones volunteering to be the camp capos.
Comment by TJH — June 9, 2008 @ 11:57 am
Something will need to be said about the Constitution Party some time before the election. However, Baldwin drops lines like this that make one question whether he is a thinking man:
“When the 1936 Olympics were held in Berlin, Germany, President Roosevelt refused to attend those ceremonies for fear that his presence would give honor and prestige to the notorious Adolf Hitler.” (source)
But in 1936, what was notorious about Adolf Hitler? The Autobahn? The Volkswagon?
Think man think!
Comment by TJH — August 4, 2008 @ 10:52 am