Lion of the Blogosphere

Obama, the bitter and vindictive lame duck

Imagine if Hillary Rodham Clinton had won the election instead of Trump. Do you think Obama would have suddenly reversed our Israel policy? Would Obama have expelled Russian diplomats?

The answer, of course is no, he would have quietly passed on these issues and let HRC handle them, and it’s hard to imagine that Russian “hacking” would have been an issue at all.

Obama is in bitter and vindictive mode and the goal is to sabotage Trump’s presidency by giving him a foreign policy mess to start out with.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

December 31, 2016 at 8:59 AM

Posted in Politics

106 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. gays are the worst.


    December 31, 2016 at 9:17 AM

    • That’s fer shure. Given the unprecedented normalization (and worse) of gays during the past 8 years, its difficult to ignore the bath-house stories and other tells that point to the fact that Barry may be gayer than a parrot.

      What turmoil must roil in that little head of his! Unable to identify as a “real” African-American, unable to admit his sexual preferences. And now turfed out of office by his own worst nightmare. As a nation the US should count themselves lucky he’s actually done such limited damage – so far.

      And now he intends to stick around to try to stick it to Trump. Say what you will about GWB – at least he showed class in his final days and when he left office. Never interfered in the 2008 election, engineered the perfect transition, and kept his mouth diplomatically shut during the 8-year train-wreck.

      After the feint towards following his predecessor’s great example, Barry just can’t help himself, and is on the path to emulating the classless transition of the grifter Clintonistas. Then again, gays are notoriously catty, so we shouldn’t be surprised I suppose.


      December 31, 2016 at 12:44 PM

      • “Say what you will about GWB – at least he showed class in his final days and when he left office. Never interfered in the 2008 election, engineered the perfect transition, and kept his mouth diplomatically shut during the 8-year train-wreck.”

        Plus he took up painting, which is pretty cool and emulates Winston Churchill. (Although of the two, I’d say that Churchill is the better artist.)

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 31, 2016 at 12:46 PM

      • “And now he intends to stick around to try to stick it to Trump.”

        I’ve been saying this all along but I think he would have stayed around and been a pain in Hillary’s ass if she had been elected. (Although I do agree w/Lion that he wouldn’t have antagonized Israel.)

        He is going to be the unofficial President of BRA in absentia.


        December 31, 2016 at 1:12 PM

      • Yeah GWB just left him a completely devastated country, what a class act. Jesus christ some of you are complete idiots.


        December 31, 2016 at 5:58 PM

      • I couldn’t agree more about how W’s class showed during the transition. I’ll never forget how, for the good of the country, he sat their stoically during Obama’s inauguration while Obama badmouthed him.

        December 31, 2016 at 10:43 PM

  2. Too bad for Obama that nothing he does is going to make much of a difference. Trump is 100 times more clever and creative than Obama could ever be. The fact that Putin decided not to retaliate must really piss them off.


    December 31, 2016 at 9:28 AM

    • President Putin did not retaliate because he knows, come January 21, 2017, relations with Russia will normalize and Russia’s diplomats welcomed back with open arms by President Trump. Someone in Trump’s administration may even officially apologize for Bathhouse Barry’s hissy fit.

      Adults like President Putin know better than to take seriously a petulant brat’s temper tantrum.


      December 31, 2016 at 1:17 PM

  3. Personally I prefer the alternative that most of his policy positions, on nearly most everything, are just wrong. I know people like that: whatever they believe or argue in favour of, it’s likely that the polar opposite is a better option. The audience here knows a lot more of Obama’s policies than I do, but exactly what has he got right?! I’m not aware of anything. City Journal has an article describing the disastrous policy of equal punishment rates in schools for blacks and whites. Everything he does sucks!

    The lioncub

    December 31, 2016 at 9:37 AM

    • That’s a type of HBD denialism. All evidence is that black children misbehave at higher rates than white children.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      December 31, 2016 at 9:54 AM

      • Case in point, just returned from the drugstore, where the (white) gentleman in front of me was fruitlessly trying to discipline his (brown) 8 or 9-year old son. I suppose his wife could well have been black, but I saw no genetic resemblance whatsoever, and my first thoughts were “you poor sod, you swallowed the denialism hook, line and sinker and adopted outside your race.”

        One data point, sure, but my cousin did the same thing, and guess what…


        December 31, 2016 at 3:52 PM

    • In foreign policy he was one of the best President’s in US history. Obamacare was a good first step to us getting universal healthcare in place of the shitshow we have have now.

      Obama is the worst President in US history, but only because of immigration which is far and away the most important issue. But the reality is that he was just what the doctor ordered after the Bush years. This country needed a break from Republican retardation.

      Otis the Sweaty

      December 31, 2016 at 12:52 PM

      • Obama’s foreign policy has been terrible. One disastrous craven grovelling retreat after another. Worse than 8 years of Jimmy Carter.

        And part of the reason for that is precisely that there was NO break in foreign policy from the Bush years. Obama did the exact same stupid shit as Bush; drone strikes, futile COIN campaigns, stupidly overthrowing perfectly satisfactory pro-US Arab leaders, illegal and (worse) unnecessary wars of aggression. But when Obama does it, it’s all sheer genius, yay!


        December 31, 2016 at 6:41 PM

      • I have no idea what you’re talking about. In foreign policy, his goal was the same as it was for domestic policy, I.e. diluting the power of whites. So, unlimited Mexers for us, and unlimited Africans for Europe by removing Ghadaffi


        December 31, 2016 at 8:09 PM

      • He did exactly the same thing as Bush, destroyed Libya with no apparent reason. The only difference was that Bush had to do something after nine eleven and he couldn’t guess exactly what the result would be. Obama was under no such pressure and he knew exactly, from the previous experience in Iraq, what the result would be. So basically he was much more of an idiot. Not to mention his support of the Arab spring which destroyed Syria, lucky for the Egyptians they realised he is a traitor and crashed his friends the Muslim brothers.


        January 1, 2017 at 12:29 AM

  4. Inside, Obama is a juvenile delinquent.

    Calvin Hobbes

    December 31, 2016 at 9:38 AM

  5. I wonder if he’s inspired by the North Carolina transition.


    December 31, 2016 at 10:02 AM

  6. The pumpkin Person evaluates Obama IQ at 140 and Trump’s one at 120. And i think he is quite good at guessing IQs and is not an HBD denialist. But he is neither an hypocrite nor a racist .

    Then , that has nothing to do that a 140 IQ person could have very bad policies, and not be likeable, and a 120 IQ very good ones. Maybe Hitler and Kennedy could be good examples of that.

    *not to say that Hitler had 140, but he certainly had more that 130, like lot’s of the nazi tested by US psychologist at Nurenberg.

    Bruno from Paris

    December 31, 2016 at 10:10 AM

    • Unlikely regarding Obama IMO. Any estimates of his verbal and math SAT scores?

      I’d put Obama at perhaps IQ 115-125. And 125 would be a courtesy estimate. Black educational achievements say nothing these days, and he appears to never have published anything as editor or as an academic. Excepting those apparently ghostwritten memoirs. The one thing that hints at Barack having some intellectual potential is that he has a half sibling, Mark Okoth Obama/Ndesanjo, who has a respectable Physics MSc (which I hope is not entirely made from AA gibs). Though Mark at least nowadays isn’t active in the field.


      December 31, 2016 at 12:48 PM

      • Obama has an IQ of 145 to 150. Sorry, I know how want to think he’s dumb, but he’s not.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 31, 2016 at 12:50 PM

      • To make Harvard Law Review you need an IQ of 140 at minimum. The guy is really smart.

        Otis the Sweaty

        December 31, 2016 at 12:53 PM

      • Lion is right. Boys get their IQs from their mothers (X Chromosome inheritance). Stanley Ann was very brilliant, came from a brilliant family, lots of quants.


        December 31, 2016 at 1:14 PM

      • Lion’s estimate of 145-150 seems unlikely. Where is the evidence? His responses to unprepared questions seem laboured, hesitant and lacking in any great insight. And as you say he has nothing published – that would be unusual if his mental abilities are so great. Also, were his IQ really in that range, that would put him roughly in the top 20 African American adults in the whole of the US. I doubt that is so.

        The lioncub

        December 31, 2016 at 1:54 PM

      • Magna cum laude Harvard Law School.

        Wrote a best-selling memoir, and I don’t buy into the conspiracy theory that he had a ghostwriter.

        That’s 145 IQ.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 31, 2016 at 3:55 PM

      • Obama is a consummate Machiavellian character. He moves his chess pieces very well. Sociopaths know when to please and know when to piss, and when it comes to politics, it’s both a domestic and an global game.


        December 31, 2016 at 2:27 PM

      • Based on what?


        December 31, 2016 at 3:13 PM

      • How could someone with a 140 IQ not be able to handle anything after 8th grade math, as he has said AND write so poorly? (I’m going by the actual few writings we’ve seen outside of his books.)


        December 31, 2016 at 3:44 PM

      • lol @ thinking an IQ of 140 is going to make you a good writer

        james n.s.w

        December 31, 2016 at 5:09 PM

      • Calling the use of a ghostwriter “conspiracy theory” is prejudicial. Ghostwriters are pretty common and passing off the work as one’s on is hardly unheard of.


        December 31, 2016 at 5:52 PM

      • Ghostwriters are common for PEOPLE WHO ARE ALREADY RICH OR FAMOUS. Obama was neither when he wrote his memoir. He couldn’t afford a ghostwriter.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 31, 2016 at 5:58 PM

      • Obama may not have been rich or famous but, by that time, he had the support of those who were. Obama and Ayres were both closely linked to Soros. Even if that weren’t true, Ayres was radical enough to write it for free.


        December 31, 2016 at 6:03 PM

      • Even “radicals” have better things to do with their time than write memoirs for nobodies.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 31, 2016 at 10:58 PM

      • “Obama has an IQ of 145 to 150. ” — oh bullshit. What’s the evidence?


        December 31, 2016 at 6:42 PM

      • Evidence: HLS magna cum laude.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 31, 2016 at 11:02 PM

      • Puhlease. Affirmative action grades.


        January 5, 2017 at 8:38 AM

      • “Ghostwriters are common for PEOPLE WHO ARE ALREADY RICH OR FAMOUS. Obama was neither when he wrote his memoir. He couldn’t afford a ghostwriter.”

        He got a ghostwriter because he was already identified as a future “superstar”. He was cosseted and promoted every step of the way despite his total lack of intrinsic merit.


        December 31, 2016 at 6:44 PM

      • According to this Obama had an advance of $125,000 to write a book after the NY Times did an article on him as editor of Harvard Law Review. Cashill makes the point that Obama’s earlier writing wasn’t of the same quality, so it seems plausible to me someone (maybe Ayers?) read over it & made tweaks, but who knows. Either way, I agree Obama is smart and as Rubio said, “knows what he’s doing”.


        December 31, 2016 at 7:27 PM

      • “Sorry, I know how want to think he’s dumb, but he’s not.”

        I would hardly characterize an IQ in the vicinity of 125 as “dumb”, so a bit of a straw-man there. But then again, I am barely able to make the Mensa grade, and presumably Lion is well to the north of that. So to him 125 may well qualify as “dumb” (comparatively speaking).


        December 31, 2016 at 7:48 PM

      • I don’t really see Obama’s performance at Harvard as strong evidence for an IQ of 145 or more. He didn’t really write much of anything for the Law Review. And the campus at the time was racially charged with the Derrick Bell controversy and demands from student groups for the school to take on more black professors. Students surely elected him Editor in part to send a message to the faculty and signal their relative virtue. I don’t think Obama is dumb by any means, but 145 is a pretty high bar to clear.

        January 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM

      • Being elected to president of the Law Review is a political accomplishment, and Obama is very good at politics.

        My rating of his intelligence is based on magna cum laude and writing a memoir (and I see no convincing evidence that it was ghostwritten).

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        January 1, 2017 at 1:46 AM

      • In my opinion Lion is closest to gauging B.O.’s intelligence. I disagree with his objectives, and I wonder about his narcissism, plus I wonder if he isn’t using the black race for his own aggrandizement because he is narcissistic, but I think Lion is closer than anyone else at gauging his intelligence.

        I’m Obama’s age and I have friends who know him personally from his life prior to law school. First, he attended Punahou which has harder entrance requirements than most colleges. Yes, he hung out with the stoners but these were the brighter sort of stoners. Yes, he became obsessed with blackness being the only black kid in an all White-Asian school on an Island where the locals were more dismissive of blacks than southern whites ever were (don’t let Asians fool you, they hold most everyone else, particularly blacks, in contempt). No, he didn’t particularly display extraordinary intelligence in high school, but he did display potential and had moments of high tactical competence, particularly for his age. He was also very good at ingratiating himself to whites. He also liked being the leader. And, it appears he buckled down and turned things around in college.


        January 1, 2017 at 1:26 AM

      • Obama’s verbal IQ likely is around 140-145. His quantitative IQ is almost surely far, far more pedestrian, likely around average. Hence, he can have an IQ in the 120s and still get magna cum laude at Harvard Law.


        January 1, 2017 at 5:18 AM

      • A low math score on the SAT possibly explains why people think his SAT score wasn’t that great.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        January 1, 2017 at 11:35 AM

      • Universities are filled with social promotion for minorities. How do you disentangle this effect from Obama’s ability.

        I’m aware that grading is anonymous, but the tests are essay based, and it is very easy to telegraph race in an essay.


        January 1, 2017 at 3:11 PM

      • Sid –

        Most IQ tests differentiate between verbal IQ and performance / visuo-spatial IQ. Mathematical ability is related to both verbal and visuo-spatial IQ.


        January 1, 2017 at 4:06 PM

    • JFKS IQ was like 110-115. the guy was not that bright.

      the h-man’s IQ was up there, probably 135+ but very easily could have been 140 or above. though a problem is he could have had slow processing speeds and performance/verbal IQ deficits due to brain abnormalities on account of the fact that he was likely a sperg, so IQ might not necessarily have been a good indicator of his cognitive potential.

      james n.s.w

      December 31, 2016 at 5:17 PM

    • We are told most authoritatively by our host that Obama has an IQ between 140 and 145. Presumably he has seen compelling evidence of this. I just hope he did not rely on the Pumpkin person for that “evidence”.

      The “evidence” that Pumpkin person presents is just not compelling IMO. Dig into his “Evidence of an IQ around 140” and you would be hard pressed to find any convincing points not propped up by partisan, political narratives or misinformation. We have no empirical information upon which to base an estimate of 140, and plenty of evidence that things are not what they seem (suppression of his academic record for starters).

      Are we, for instance, supposed to imagine that the leftist Laurence Tribe was being objective in describing Obama as the “best student he ever had”? Remember, this is the same Laurence Tribe (what an appropriate last name) who was censured by all sides for taking a cheap shot at Trump, one headline reading “In ‘Dumbest’ Move, Well-Known Law Prof Reportedly Broke Ethics Rules in Perceived Shot at Trump”, and one perspicuous commenter noted “it’s sad to see Tribe, idolized even when I was in law school, turns out to be a political hack, who cares nothing about the oath of being an attorney.”

      Now mind you, given his legal work in other areas that drive the progressives insane, I do have some respect for Tribe, as a constitutional legal scholar. As a political animal though, he’s proved himself a rabid ideologue (and worse).

      And are supposed to swallow the narrative that the fact that Obama’s first scripted press conference (remember the narrative?) went smoothly means that he is (or can be) extremely verbally skilled? Apparently, he sure fooled Dick Morris. LOL.

      We know about “his” writing abilities and the very strong evidence of a ghost-writer, and the remaining points of “Evidence of an IQ around 140”” are a mixed bag, and hardly convincing as such.

      Meanwhile, the factually grounded eight points representing “Evidence of an IQ below 118” are sloughed off, and we are asked to take several leaps of faith, together with some statistically questionable, if not flawed, steps to come to the conclusion to that Obama’s IQ is around 140.

      Not convincing. Real evidence please.

      One apparent real piece of evidence is his SAT score of 1206, which corresponds to an IQ of approximately 125. Now how do you suppose to get from 125 to 140 (an increase of more than 1SD)? You can’t, unless you apply the narrative;-)

      “Obama is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people.” – Clint Eastwood


      December 31, 2016 at 6:23 PM

      • Maybe this is old ground, but likewise it doesn’t suggest Obama has an exceptionally high IQ.

        The lioncub

        January 1, 2017 at 7:26 AM

      • If the SAT score is valid, it seems far more convincing than any HLS degree. It also fits with presidents usually having about 120 IQ. I’d rate Barack as sub-120 myself, but that’s of course mere conjecture.

        It’s not difficult to envision Harvard and the rest of the Cathedral manufacturing The One from a black guy who would have been a likeable diplomat or suchlike. Just add the sacred HLS Magna Cum Laude and editorial position; have your pal get him a prestigious-enough academic position afterwards; when he stalls out in academica, make sure he gets a big advance for writing something; jazz up his possibly leaden memoirs using someone skilled (Bill Ayers?); make sure said memoirs get great reviews in the usual places of record. Does that seem impossible? It can all be done within the usual Cathedral contact book. The hardest part was probably getting him into the Senate.


        January 1, 2017 at 12:08 PM

      • “I’d rate Barack as sub-120 myself”

        That’s wishful thinking because you hate liberals, or maybe because you hate black people, or misunderstand HBD.

        I concede that Obama may have a mismatched math/verbal ability, and that his verbal ability is much higher than his math ability. His verbal non-math IQ is 145 according to my estimates. Sorry if that causes you cognitive dissonance or something.

        Underestimating one’s enemy, by the way, is one of the worst mistakes you can ever make.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        January 1, 2017 at 12:25 PM

      • I can agree with Obama probably having a high verbal score, though I’m not sure about 140-145. What’s the average black or mulatto verbal score?

        However, since I already have the belief that blacks generally are better at verbal than math (particularly actual verbal rather than SAT verbal), I’m afraid this causes me little confusion or agony of any sort.


        January 1, 2017 at 1:36 PM

      • “What’s the average black or mulatto verbal score?”

        That doesn’t matter. Obama isn’t average and he didn’t have average parents.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        January 1, 2017 at 1:42 PM

      • The bottom line is, a white man with Obama’s credentials would not have gotten anywhere.


        January 1, 2017 at 2:57 PM

      • He would have gotten a high-paying job in BIGLAW or a law professor job at a prestigious law school. Harvard Law Review is one of the most elite credentials you can have in law.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        January 1, 2017 at 3:01 PM

      • The average scores of those groups matter because they make the great Obama less or more likely.


        January 1, 2017 at 3:48 PM

      • A white person never would have gotten in to Harvard Law school with Obama’s credentials. If Obama were white, he’d have a degree from somewhere like Temple Law School or something.


        January 1, 2017 at 6:53 PM

      • George W Bush scored 1206, Obama’s SAT score is unknown.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        January 2, 2017 at 12:38 AM

  7. Obama is just playing American politics as usual. Had a GOPe won the election, things would have been different as well.


    December 31, 2016 at 10:13 AM

  8. Goddamn Democrats never go away. Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter didn’t; neither will Obama.

    It’s only the controlled-opposition respectable cuck Republican presidents who quietly slink away and blow kisses to their successor.

    Honestly, we’re only reaching the beginning of the End here. Whatever Trump will try to accomplish will be bitterly opposed; and the demographic shift will not stop either way.

    After Trump, the Dems will be fully radicalized into an anti-White party and an explicitly Pro-white party will emerge. It’s crazy, but we’re going to live to see exactly why history repeats itself.


    December 31, 2016 at 11:48 AM

    • I think we might see the Democrats crack apart. The Bernie Bros don’t seem entirely comfortable with all black all the time.


      December 31, 2016 at 12:49 PM

      • I doubt the Democrats will crack apart, at least not like that.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 31, 2016 at 12:51 PM

      • The left has been fantasizing for years about a break up of the Republican party, and it was never in the cards simply because of the way the US political system is set up. Likewise the Dems are in no danger of breaking up.

        What could happen is that the Dems could nominate a Bernie type candidate who would push a lot of otherwise socially liberal whites who don’t want to give more free stuff to blacks and don’t want to let black criminals run wild into the Republican fold. Hillary was able to hold on to the overwhelming majority of those whites not just because she was running against Trump, but also because she was seen as a “moderate”. Once the Dems are seen as leftist as opposed to centrist, they are finished amongst whites.

        Otis the Sweaty

        December 31, 2016 at 1:04 PM

      • What makes it so unlikely that either party will crack apart is that politicians want to win. And it doesn’t do special interest any good to own a politician if they can’t get them elected. So they’ll modify the message and actions to whatever they need in order to get their guy elected. They may miscalculate and get creamed in an election or two. But they’ll eventually adapt their message to something that works. Exception being the last 8 years. While Obama was busy ramming his agenda through the Dems were getting slaughtered in local elections. They’ve lost over 1,000 offices under Obama. That’s really going to hurt because they have no pool to draw on. However, it will give whoever is in charge now the opportunity to remake the party in their image.


        December 31, 2016 at 6:17 PM

      • Both are going to crack up. We’re already seeing it. Segments of each Democrat and GOP coalition are going to defect to the other side – where frankly they’ll all be happier.


        December 31, 2016 at 6:45 PM

      • All the Bernie supporters in my social media feeds are 100% gung-ho on board with the SJW agenda, lamentations of “white privilege” and all. My pro-Bernie cousin even makes rap in his spare time. The one exception is my Bernie-supporting left-wing father, who frankly admits he thinks blacks are innately less intelligent than whites.


        December 31, 2016 at 11:15 PM

      • The Dems have a pretty solid bench. Kander, Gillibrand, Booker, Newsome, Duckworth, Cortez-Masto and Harris are all relatively young and would be good national candidates. Also it is possible either a celebrity like Clooney or a billionaire like Cuban could run. The Dems do have some serious problems but lack of talent isn’t one of them. Just look how terrible the supposedly star studded list of Republican candidates was in 2016.

        Also, nobody is going to remake the Dems. The Dems are the party of liberals and minorities and that will not change. What is possible, albeit unlikely in my view, is that the left wing moonbats take over Dems the way they have taken over Labour in the UK.

        I don’t see any significant amount of either coalition jumping ship for the other side. There is no place for the Kasich and McCain types in the current Democratic party and there is no place in the current Republican party for open borders cucks.

        Otis the Sweaty

        January 1, 2017 at 12:20 AM

      • If the Bernie Bro part of the coalition wins, the blacks probably stay home and they lose the election. If the BLM part wins, Bernie Bros will have to be happy with standing back and applauding all black all the time while leaving their other pet causes in the cold. I think that wears thin rather quickly. Will they be able to manipulate the party behind the scenes enough to be satisfied? You tell me.

        I can see the Bernie Bros going the way of ex-communists in Europe: to the Greens. Their ultimate destination is of course the White Party.


        January 1, 2017 at 12:16 PM

    • Most upper class whites are not going to be happy long term in Trump’s coalition of proles. There are already signs that Trump is going to abandon explicit white nationalism for a more traditional Republican strategy of low taxes, anti-regulation, pro-energy lobby, pro-Israel, and aggressive foreign policy. The only substantive difference between Trump and the Cruz/Rubio/Ryan wing is that Trump wants to team up with Russia against China instead of the traditional pro-China, anti-Russia policy we have been favoring. But even that is arguably a return to the policy GWB seemed to be pursuing before 9/11 changed foreign policy focus.

      I don’t think Obama’s abandonment of Israel is sour grapes. It is a shrewd political decision to try to cut Trump off from his anti- Semitic alt right voters and push Trump into the arms of the establishment Republicans where he can be tamed. The sanctions against Russia are also a calculated political move to expose tensions between Trump and the establishment and the military. A significant portion of our officer corps is going to be very unhappy if we abandon Ukraine now after all the energy and time we have dedicated to that place. Obama, and probably a number of Republicans behind the scenes, are hoping they can create a rift between Trump and Putin.

      Peter Akuleyev

      January 1, 2017 at 12:27 PM

      • Obama’s diplomatic moves are clearly just sour grapes. Even most leftists admit that.

        It has always been obvious that Trump didn’t give a shit about the anti semitic of his supporters. They are too statistically few to mean anything.

        “There are already signs that Trump is going to abandon explicit white nationalism for a more traditional Republican strategy of low taxes, anti-regulation, pro-energy lobby, pro-Israel, and aggressive foreign policy.”

        That is all in your head. Sessions at Justice, Miller leading the policy team, Bannon as chief advisor and almost certainly Kobach as deputy at DHS are only moves you make if you are serious about seeing through the destruction of the immigrant community. He has repeatedly doubled down on the wall since the election. Tillerson at state and the guy he has at defense show he is serious about having a pro Russia, anti war foreign policy.

        As for the officer corps, who cares? They are a bunch of open borders cucks. They were going to oppose Trump no matter what.

        All the typical GOPe things about Trump: tax cuts, dereg and some form of amnesty were things he was supporting even before the election.

        As for college educated whites not wanting to share their party with proles, they prefer it to sharing a party with blacks. The Romney voters will be back for Trump in 2020 and as the Dems become more explicitly defined by BLM, open borders, enviro wackos and free stuff for blacks, the exodus of college educated whites will continue.

        Otis the Sweaty

        January 1, 2017 at 10:41 PM

  9. Perhaps Yakov would have some insight here. There are around 1.2 million Russians living in Israel. How much high-level cooperation and integration do you think there is between Russian and Israeli intelligence agencies? Both countries, of course, are under threat from Islamic extremists.

    One reason spy Jonathan Pollard is still in prison is because the top secret information he gave to Israeli intelligence was soon leaked to Soviet intelligence. The outgoing Obama administration is rebuking both Russia and Israel with equal vehemence, as if the two countries were somehow connected. Steve Sailer even speculated (but ultimately rejected the idea) that not Russian but Israeli intelligence hacked the DNC emails. But maybe the difference between Russian and Israeli intelligence isn’t so great.

    Mark Caplan

    December 31, 2016 at 12:22 PM

    • Steve Sailer even speculated (but ultimately rejected the idea) that not Russian but Israeli intelligence hacked the DNC emails.

      Maybe Sailer is an Israeli agent assigned with making the altright look stupid?

      The Undiscovered Jew

      December 31, 2016 at 3:22 PM

      • Steve Sailer is writing to his anti-Semitic audience.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 31, 2016 at 3:57 PM

      • Steve Sailer is writing to his anti-Semitic audience.

        That contingent of the audience has sent the quality of discussion around what was called HBD into a nosedive; much worse than it was five years ago.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 31, 2016 at 5:25 PM

    • Pollard is not in prison he’s out on parole. That probably happened as part of a deal to shut Bibi up about the Iran deal. It is true the Soviets got some of the same Info Pollard gave to Israel. But that most likely came from Aldrich Ames.

      In the very early days of the state of Israel the Soviet intelligence services and the Israeli secret police the Shabak were very close. But that has not been true in decades since Ben-Gurion purged the military and intelligence apparatus of stalinists.

      I believe Obama genuinely despises Israel as an affront to the Islamic world, and hates Russia for making him look like a fool in Syria.


      December 31, 2016 at 7:51 PM

    • Israel and Russian never had good intelligence relationships since the Russians were always supporting Israel’s enemies and it was very risky to share info with them. However since Obama and especially since the Syrian civil war there is much more military cooperation and mutual understandings. There are special teams from both air forces cooperating constantly to prevent misunderstandings and to keep both countries interests. It also helps that the Israeli Defence minister speaks Russian.


      January 1, 2017 at 12:42 AM

      • Israel was briefly allied with Russia, and France, in the 1950s. That came to an end a decade later when Russia decided to fully support Israel’s Arab opponents so long as those Arabs remained under the Soviet sphere.

        With the Cold War over and many Russian citizens in Israel, relations with Russia have improved under Putin.

        Interestingly, while Putin has successfully reached out to Israel, France’s foreign policy establishment remains stubbornly Arabist despite now routine ISIS attacks against France.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        January 1, 2017 at 11:46 AM

  10. Thanks Schindler, but I still don’t understand why we’re supposed to be afraid of Russia:

    The Russian actions in Syria are (at worst) morally ambiguous, while the conflict in eastern Ukraine sounds a lot less lethal than a typical weekend in Chicago:


    December 31, 2016 at 12:27 PM

  11. ‘Happy New Year to all, including to my many enemies and those who have fought me and lost so badly they just don’t know what to do. Love!’

    Bitter and vindictive winner. And eventually he will be a lame duck too.


    December 31, 2016 at 12:39 PM

    • He’s justified in feeling that way after the libs and the mainstream media treated him and continue to treat him.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      December 31, 2016 at 12:43 PM

    • Fake news, fake analysis.

      President Trump has Republican majorities in both houses, and that means voters gave him a mandate to enact the entirety of his agenda. If voters want grid lock, they give both parties some power. Not this time.



      December 31, 2016 at 1:22 PM

      • I agree. Plus, if one discounts the 80 million foreign born “citizens” who disproportionately support democrats and welfare then Trump dominated the election by real Americans.


        December 31, 2016 at 5:59 PM

  12. Republicans seem to be all over the map on the Russian sanctions.

    Paul Ryan said the Russian sanctions were overdue and claimed Obama had been slow to take action.

    John McCain called the Russian cyberattacks on the election and act or war. McCain called Obama’s sanctions “long overdue” and called on Congress to enact tougher sanctions.

    Trump supporters are saying Obama is just bitter and vindictive, trying to screw up Trump’s foreign policy.


    December 31, 2016 at 2:30 PM

  13. Trump’s tweet is in very bad taste. A president isn’t supposed to consider his fellow Americans enemies. Whatever happened to bringing the nation together?

    Deal with it!

    December 31, 2016 at 5:22 PM

    • We don’t want to bring the nation together. The left are enemies to be destroyed, not countrymen to be embraced.

      Otis the Sweaty

      December 31, 2016 at 6:08 PM

      • Again, anyone who lives in a liberal center like Manhattan and SF and embraces the right-o-sphere is a hypocrite.

        The left consists of women who live in these centers, White men who live in these centers, and the various 3rd world primitives that grease the wheels so they could sleep at night, along with their betters, who receive all kinds of perks at the expense of Whites in America’s heartland, parts of the South and other prole towns.


        January 1, 2017 at 12:08 AM

      • Again, anyone who lives in a liberal center like Manhattan and SF and embraces the right-o-sphere is a hypocrite.

        The left consists of women who live in these centers, White men who live in these centers, and the various 3rd world primitives that grease the wheels so they could sleep at night, along with their betters, who receive all kinds of perks at the expense of Whites in America’s heartland, parts of the South and other prole towns.

        Don’t forget that it is those liberal centers that are the center of the American 21st Century economy. You should come out to silicon valley and see who are the engineers working here. Yes there are white Caucasians, like me, but we are a minority. Silicon valley has attracted the best and brightest from around the world. The tribalism you speak of is in the centers of the failing 20th century manufacturing economy.
        Offshoring and immigrant workers are a small part of the problem. Automation is going to replace 90% of the jobs. Even if Trump can convince companies to move manufacturing back to the USA, they will do it in highly automate factories that employ far fewer workers. Manufacturing employment has no were to go but down.

        Leaders need to start planning how to be competitive in the 21st century. Stop blaming trade deals and immigration for failures to adopt to the 21st century. In silicon valley we have no interest in your tribalism.


        January 1, 2017 at 1:46 AM

      • There’s nothing wrong with living in Manhattan or SF. Prolesville only sounds good in the comments of alt-right blogs, the reality of it sucks.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        January 1, 2017 at 1:48 AM

      • Yes there are white Caucasians, like me, but we are a minority.</i

        … and yet you haven't embraced tribalism. Something is broken with you.

        Samson J.

        January 1, 2017 at 10:19 AM

      • Prolesville only sounds good in the comments of alt-right blogs, the reality of it sucks

        I’m mostly loathe to respond to this kind of a trolling remark… but – I remain fascinated by people who dwell in big cities, and actually seem to like them, and never leave them.

        I wonder – I mean I genuinely wonder – does Lion realize that across North America there is a vast landscape of picturesque, pleasant small towns? Does he grasp that for every town that is a hole (and I grant that many towns are), there is one that hosts a university, a hospital or some other centre that draws an educated crowd?

        Every community above a very low population floor has a core of educated professionals. I live in a small town of about 20,000 people in rural Ontario. This Christmas, my wife and my daughter participated in chorale and orchestra performances just about as well-done as anything you could find elsewhere.

        A few days ago, because the local hospital where I work was having trouble filling some gaps over the holidays, we had a guy come up from Toronto to plug a couple of holes. This guy was genuinely afraid to walk from his car to the door, because he was afraid of wild animals. I was like, you are from a different universe, man. I’m pretty sure this guy had literally never left Toronto.

        I know Lion doesn’t seem to appreciate the insinuation that Jews share general racial characteristics, but sometimes I wonder if Jews, like Asians, have a greater built-in ability to tolerate urban clutter and less of a need for nature than Germanics.

        Samson J.

        January 1, 2017 at 10:36 AM

      • “does Lion realize that across North America there is a vast landscape of picturesque, pleasant small towns?”

        Yes, I’ve been to SWPL small towns like Cazenovia, NY. Very nice place.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        January 1, 2017 at 11:40 AM

      • Mikeca,

        Yeah, the “best and brightest” coming in from around the world to build websites in Silicon Valley. You do realize that the entire Silicon Valley economy sits on a peculiar interpretation of intellectual property law…that people’s private data somehow belongs to Google and Facebook. You do realize that, when a “right to be forgotten law” is institutionalized, the valuations of most of these Silicon Valley companies go down to zero, right?

        Silicon Balley is basically a technology version of financial engineering, cobbled together by legal rules, not a fundamental technology that we all depend on.

        But there is something deeper. Compare two approximately fifty-year periods, say 1920-1970 and 1970-2020. The earlier period represented incredible advances in science and technology that completely changed the world: commercialized aircraft and automobiles. Radio, television, radar, rockets, microwave ovens, the computer, the nuclear bomb, welding, cryptography, DNA, the transistor, the moon landing, satellites, the Internet, just to name a few. These advances completely changed the world.

        After 1970? Nothing but incremental improvements. So what happened after 1970? Oh… the best and brightest from around the world. It used to be that we would celebrate a scientist like William Shockley. Nowadays, an Indian with a phd from Stanford gets kudos for inventing the USB port.

        It’s a joke.

        After 19


        January 1, 2017 at 2:37 PM

    • You mean the people saying “not my president”??? He wished them “love” and “happy new year”. I think that was sweet.

      I’m all for bringing people together. But I don’t see how it’s his job to pander to radicals who hate America. They’re just wrong and need to be defeated. After their agenda is crushed and they concede, then we can talk about bringing people together.


      December 31, 2016 at 6:23 PM

    • He tried that after the election. Trump was very conciliatory to both Hillary and Obama, but ultimately, there were not having any of it, and their proxies in the media declared war with there fake news/Russia-hacked-the-election fake stories. The fact is, the establishment is going to go total war on Trump, and Trump recognizes it.

      Mike Street Station

      December 31, 2016 at 8:00 PM

      • I hope it was just to show the public that Trump is willing to be magnanimous in victory and remind them what sort of people are on the other side, because this election was all about the uselessness of trying to compromise and make friends with the left.


        January 1, 2017 at 3:52 PM

  14. “magine if Hillary Rodham Clinton had won the election instead of Trump. Do you think Obama would have suddenly reversed our Israel policy? Would Obama have expelled Russian diplomats?”

    The news coverage would have been radically different. The election would have been considered fair and balanced, and only a right wing conspiracy nut would think the Russians, or anyone else, hacked our election. There would be no upset about fake news and the term wouldn’t have been invented.

    Mike Street Station

    December 31, 2016 at 8:02 PM

  15. Dems are in serious trouble on several fronts. They will keep getting pushed to the left by radicals in the party because that’s where the energy is. White gentry liberals like Clinton and Kerry will get dethroned by the emerging black and Hispanic upstarts. This will start to scare white moderate liberals and drive them away.

    At the same time pro-Israel Jews will shift to Republican along with 2nd gen Indians and Asians. Trump can build a coalition of traditional white Americans coupled with these high iq minorities against a de fact communist black/Hispanic party. This would be disastrous for Democrats.


    December 31, 2016 at 10:19 PM

    • Proles don’t like South Asians or East Asians, because they are seen as competition in a similar but different manner in which SWPLs view them. An attempt to curb human tribalism via capitalism was America’s biggest failure.

      Calling for the secession of states and the re-segregation of groups is the only solution to America’s woes.


      January 1, 2017 at 12:15 AM

  16. lion, have you heard of this new term IYI? intellectual yet idiot. it works perfectly for obama with the 140IQ.


    January 1, 2017 at 7:59 AM

  17. Oh come now Lion. Are you really saying this is a swipe at Trump? This angry Queen knows his career is over. He never cared about his Party. The Democrats have been hemorrhaging seats and losing elections, and he hasn’t done squat.
    Anyone who says he wouldn’t have done this if Hillary had won, doesn’t understand anything. Obama fucking HATES the Clintons. That offhand comment Bubba made about him fetching coffee before he became a Senator dug deep into Queen Obama’s thin skin. Obama and Hillary have an old fashioned Queen Bee fight going on since they squared off for the Nomination in 2008. They haven’t buried the hatchet on that one.
    Let me tell you something about fags. Old Queens are the worst of them. They age poorly. Obama and Hillary are both Queen Bees for the Nomination. Neither really finished off the other. That “grassroots” electioneering for Moochelle was Obama’s parting shot on Hillary. All this Israel stuff is his old axe against “Colonialism”. For these dark skinned folks, any White country lording over dark skinned folk is “Colonialism”. Those crayola crayon politics is color coded hatred.

    Joshua Sinistar

    January 1, 2017 at 10:16 AM

  18. Obama has an IQ > 130. He may well be the most intelligent President since Nixon. Trump is certainly one of the lesser lights, probably below 115 and declining with age. Trump shows no intellectual curiosity, has a poor vocabulary and doesn’t seem to understand sophisticated concepts. Just goes to show that IQ is not everything. Obama is probably too smart and intellectually curious to be a good leader. He seems to live in a world of abstractions and ideas. He finds the concerns of most Americans to be fairly trivial and meaningless. I think it is difficult for anyone with an IQ over 130 to really be a patriot the way Proles understand patriotism. Trump’s strength is not his intellect, it is his conviction and sense of purpose. His other strength is that he married a high IQ Czech woman who gave him smart children who were indispensable in getting him elected.

    Peter Akuleyev

    January 1, 2017 at 10:58 AM

    • Do you think Obama has a higher IQ than Oprah?


      January 1, 2017 at 12:23 PM

      • Yes. Silly comparison, though since Oprah and Obama are different races. Obama is not genetically related to American Blacks.

        Peter Akuleyev

        January 1, 2017 at 12:35 PM

      • Obama is half white and half east-African. American blacks descended from slaves are west-African.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        January 1, 2017 at 1:18 PM

      • The esteemed Pumpkin Person apparently puts Oprah at 140 because self-made billionaires+ average about 135-140. That could be a viable point, though I think it might be better to look at the media subset of billionaires. He also adjusts for her apparently vast head circumference to arrive at an even higher score.

        Here’s another guy who estimates Oprah at 150, again with a very skewed verbal/math. I dunno. But at least she skipped a grade or two, which indicates something was going in her noggin.


        January 1, 2017 at 1:55 PM

      • By the way, the reason for the question was somewhat frivolous: I’ve heard Oprah has a high IQ and when I listened to Obama interviewing Marilynn Robinson, he struck me as someone who would be a good talk show host on some intellectual show (are there any of those anymore?).


        January 1, 2017 at 1:58 PM

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: