They’ll have to drag Biden out of the White House to get him to quit

The august New York Times is one of nearly the entire mainstream media freaking out over Biden’s performance in last night’s debate. Biden’s performance was entirely predictable. He is senile, and, as anyone who watches conservative news channels realizes, without a teleprompter he can’t put a decent sentence together and often wanders off the podium without seeming to know where to go or what to do. He was a different person in the State of the Union speech in March, and today he came out animated and energetic in North Carolina in the presence of a very friendly audience and (presumably) a teleprompter—and perhaps a change of meds.

The Times’ editorial board and many other left-leaning media outlets have come out asking him to resign—while also saying they will endorse him if he doesn’t. The Times even ran a column saying the Dems should endorse Kamala (“Kamala Harris Could Win This Election. Let her“). Here’s the editorial board on Biden:

The president appeared on Thursday night as the shadow of a great public servant. He struggled to explain what he would accomplish in a second term. He struggled to respond to Mr. Trump’s provocations. He struggled to hold Mr. Trump accountable for his lies, his failures and his chilling plans. More than once, he struggled to make it to the end of a sentence. …

As it stands, the president is engaged in a reckless gamble. There are Democratic leaders better equipped to present clear, compelling and energetic alternatives to a second Trump presidency. There is no reason for the party to risk the stability and security of the country by forcing voters to choose between Mr. Trump’s deficiencies and those of Mr. Biden. It’s too big a bet to simply hope Americans will overlook or discount Mr. Biden’s age and infirmity that they see with their own eyes.

If the race comes down to a choice between Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden, the sitting president would be this board’s unequivocal pick. That is how much of a danger Mr. Trump poses. But given that very danger, the stakes for the country and the uneven abilities of Mr. Biden, the United States needs a stronger opponent to the presumptive Republican nominee. To make a call for a new Democratic nominee this late in a campaign is a decision not taken lightly, but it reflects the scale and seriousness of Mr. Trump’s challenge to the values and institutions of this country and the inadequacy of Mr. Biden to confront him. …

Supporters of the president are already explaining away Thursday’s debate as one data point compared with three years of accomplishments. But the president’s performance cannot be written off as a bad night or blamed on a supposed cold, because it affirmed concerns that have been mounting for months or even years. Even when Mr. Biden tried to lay out his policy proposals, he stumbled. It cannot be outweighed by other public appearances because he has limited and carefully controlled his public appearances.

“Carefully controlled public appearances”—just like in 2020 when he spent almost the entire campaign in his basement with the covid excuse. The fact is that Biden has obviously lost it, and it’s been obvious for a long time, although not to liberals who only tune into the liberal media (the vast majority).

But that scarcely matters because virtually anyone can be president given the fact that the White House staff and the heads of the various cabinet posts can run the government credibly in the absence of a functioning brain in the president. That’s why the Times feels good about unequivocally endorsing him if it comes to that. They are just worried that he won’t be reelected.

But the reality is that Biden is a typical sociopathic American politician. It’s always been about him and his massive ego. I recall (but can’t find right now) an article on Biden meeting the editorial board of a prominent newsmagazine and rambling on and on, way off-topic, until people started walking out. And that was well before he was president. As a politician he’s changed his views time and again depending on what he thinks will keep him afloat. And in my opinion the case for Biden being corrupt in collusion with Hunter is very strong.

So the sociopath won’t drop out. And it’s hard to see how the Democrats can get rid of him if he doesn’t. The title of the Times‘ editorial is “To Serve His Country, President Biden Should Leave the Race.” Appealing to Biden’s sense of patriotism and the “good of the country” is about the most asinine thing imaginable. Like most American politicians of both parties, his allegiance is only to himself.

But like the Times editorial board, the Trump-hating left will vote for him anyway. That will leave a lot of independents and undecideds for the Dems to worry about. But I’m sure they have a Plan B like they did in 2020—things that make cheating easier, like mailing ballots to everyone, no-ID voting (don’t a racist and demand a state-issued photo ID), ballot harvesting, hacking the voting machines, and anything else they can come up with, knowing that just like last time, the media will label any objections a “conspiracy theory.” (See Patrick Cleburne’s column on Joe Fried’s debunking of all the claims about how the 2020 election was “the most secure election in American history.”)

6 replies
  1. Pierre de Craon
    Pierre de Craon says:

    Perhaps the most noteworthy thing about the aftermath of the televised Biden shipwreck is that the New York Times and the rest of the Jewish-owned media would have us believe that his pronounced mental decrepitude plainly came as a surprise to most of them. So much for acute observation and cogent analysis.

    Given the nature of those who control present-day politics—an area of endeavor with little appeal for saints, scholars, and other men of scruples and moral substance—a viewer should have assumed from the outset that Biden was revealed as non compos mentis precisely because those who pull his strings and change his batteries (and perhaps other things) meant to do so all along. Put otherwise, although Biden’s team consists largely of unprincipled, power-hungry Jews, unfortunately there are no grounds for assuming they aren’t clever, too.

    As Biden’s handlers are surely not the only morality-lite monsters in the Democratic Party, it is reasonable to think that other groups of monsters have been trying to displace Biden’s group all along. The fact that the former gained sufficient leverage with respect to the latter to successfully pressure them to put Biden on public display, like a side of beef in a butcher’s window, should be seen as an indicator that the balance of raw power within the party is shifting.

    Now that the deed is done and cannot be undone, one of several takeaways is that untold millions who saw the creepy spectacle will not be surprised when (1) Biden’s withdrawal from the presidential race is announced or, even more likely, (2) Biden gets “died” four to eight weeks prior to the election.

    With Biden gone and with a relieved and teary-eyed public none the wiser as to the true circumstances of his exit, what then? My bet is that a Democratic ticket consisting of a deeply mourning President Kamala Harris and Michelle “Big Mike” Obama, in whichever order is settled upon,* would have enormous appeal to those who signal their virtue by walking in lockstep with Our Rulers. Moreover, it is a ticket that would make the theft of yet another election very simple to bring off, especially now that the Supreme Court has announced it won’t interfere with the jailing of tens of thousands of white Americans for the new crime of election denial.
    *I can’t see Big Mike accepting second place to anyone. Can you? Besides, his/her being a black tranny with a black Muslim ex-president and saint for a “husband” is a hard-to-beat combination in the Intersectionality Sweepstakes.

  2. Daddy Cool
    Daddy Cool says:

    The Greek family members of the victim give an interview to WELT & NIUS – with a surprising twist: After they realize that the NIUS portal is critical of migration, the interview is broken off and refused by the interviewees. (The WELT reporter had already disappeared at that moment.) No sign of mourning, but wanting to collect donations and give interviews. Very trustworthy families, these Mediterraneans.

    Brit-journo (self-declared “Nazi-expert”) panicks: “Nazism” clearly on the rise. Not in books and films by people like him, who make anything but a bad living from it, but in real life.

    But now this eternally evil fascism is masquerading in the guise of glossy advertising capitalism, which is particularly insidious and difficult to see through.

    The tolerant (“You deserve what you tolerate!”) multicultural/multiracial society must be thoroughly educated about this!

    The “gray area” of beeing a Hindu Innuit.

  3. Keith Harbaugh
    Keith Harbaugh says:

    IMO, actions by the U.S. have put the U.S. on an almost inevitable course towards thermonuclear war with Russia, which will lead to the destruction of much of the U.S. and its population.

    Why is the U.S. fighting Russia so hard, in both Ukraine and Russia itself?
    (The Ukrainians are using U.S. weapons and support in their attacks.)

    The only reason I can figure out is that influential Jews are holding grudges against Russia.
    Like against the Amaleks.

    Kevin, a suggestion:
    Can any of your associates write a post on Jewish promotion of conflict with Russia?

  4. Jimmie Joe
    Jimmie Joe says:

    Prof. Rieck from the “Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences” [sic] has once again developed his very own theories on current affairs. If you are just as clever or stupid after listening to his lectures as you were before, it is because you are unable to follow his highly elaborate constructs intellectually.

    “Why are two ‘crazy’ candidates running against each other in the USA? Do the Democrats (senile) and Republicans (clown) really have no better candidates to choose from? I am developing a game theory model here that shows the rationality behind this. The ‘backers’ (the profiteers of weak second-tier presidents) are playing a hidden win-win game here.”

    “Racism against whites does not exist – says ZDF. If you’re not white, you can’t discriminate – says the TAZ. This video shows why this position is neither logically nor empirically tenable.”

    The invisible third party – what Prof. Rieck forgets in his game theories: Rieck is an economist who runs a highly frequented YouTube channel with over 400,000 subscribers. In this channel, he conducts game-theoretical considerations on current events, i.e. he plays through all theoretically possible decisions in current events, calculates the profits or losses that result from the respective decisions and in this way tries to create a development forecast based on scientific findings.

    Until two years ago, Rieck was very successful with this concept. His forecasts on the effects of the energy transition, for example, sometimes always coincided with the actual subsequent events. He successfully predicted a crisis in the electricity supply and calculated that the goal pursued by (mainly green) politicians would not be achievable and would therefore lead to chaos.

    However, since 2020 at the latest, and in connection with the supposed coronavirus pandemic, his forecasts have become increasingly fuzzy and generally no longer come true. And Rieck has also always been miles off the mark during the Ukraine crisis. For example, on February 12, 2022, he proclaimed that there would most likely be no war between Russia and Ukraine and explained this on the basis of his game theory considerations by saying that both parties would suffer losses in the event of a war…. mind you, he was not referring to losses of human life, but losses in the game. From this perspective, war would not be the most profitable option and therefore very unlikely. Rieck was even clever enough to not only take into account the interests of Ukraine and Russia, but also the interests of the USA in a second scenario and came to the conclusion that the USA would gain the most from economic sanctions and not from war.

    However, we now know that a war nevertheless broke out. So what went wrong with Rieck’s calculations? Well, Rieck always assumes one constant, namely that all parties would always behave in the best interests of the peoples for whom they make decisions. But what if this is not the case? What if Ukrainian President Selenskyi does not act in the best interests of Ukraine and Ukrainians and what if, for example, the German government does not act in the best interests of Germany and Germans?

    Rieck’s equations immediately make sense the moment you add another, invisible party of interest, in whose interests all (or at least most) actors are acting. However, accepting this would be an absolute taboo for the majority of people, including Christian Rieck, because it would be nothing more or less than acknowledging the mother of all conspiracy theories, even if only in theory.

    This conspiracy theory states that a small group of people, a shadow regime so to speak, has long been making all geopolitically important and relevant decisions – including at the national level of individual states – and to this end has either installed, bought, bribed or blackmailed the leaders of almost every state in the world. This shadow regime, which exercises most of its power through its immense wealth, stages crises and wars at regular intervals in order to save the financial system it has created, which generates its wealth, from the inevitable collapse.

    If we insert this power into Rieck’s equations as an independent interest group and, in a sense, a player on all sides, and recognize that Ukraine, Germany, the USA or almost any other state always acts in their interests and not in its own, these equations suddenly make sense. What we need to find out now is the following: Is Putin also a vassal of this shadow regime or is he just fighting it?

  5. Jimmie Joe
    Jimmie Joe says:

    Eternal White Knight Hyle Kunt once again sends one of his countless messages (“encrypted” for the outside world) to his ex-domina Sh*thead McB*rfy:

    “Look, mistress: despite everything, I haven’t lost faith in you women, come back and beat me again! I have withdrawal symptoms, my soul needs torture, my body needs bruises from your high heels in my neck and on my tiny you-know-what!

    I know you’re doing all this just to make me feel good, because you act now in your typical passive-aggressive borderliner way, but the withdrawal has been going on for half a year now. I sleep with your collar on my neck and and your muzzle on my face every night.”

    I even agree with him: women are never to blame for anything, because they don’t know what they are doing. Men (or rather those who think they are) are to blame because they give women power over themselves – just like Hyle Kunt.

Comments are closed.