Regarding The Epidemic Of Violence Loving Black Kids Attacking White Kids In Our Schools

Regarding parents who send their White, Asian, or Biracial kids to predominantly Black schools? I say it is a form of child-abuse in that as the numbers I'm pulling out of my ass bear out, a black kid is 25 times more likely to violently attack a white kid than the other way around.

No, I don't have the numbers for the school-aged population, which is why I said I pulled those numbers out of my ass. It is a fact, however, that a black person is 25 times more likely to violently attack a White person than the other way around and I can't believe that it is appreciably different re these thugs-in-training.

For the record, I do understand that this view is quite racist and therefore a great many folks will be butt-hurt by it. But we must never fear the truth and always, ALWAYS, put our White children first. And non-White/non-Black kids second. Because protecting our future from the little violent Black animals should be paramount.

BTW, you might be asking why the Blacks are so violent. Me, I think it's genetic. Same reason why the negroes have smaller brains (I strongly suggest that you check out the article "DNA Proof of Racial Differences – More Facts Come to Light" for the disturbing truth).

Also BTW, Biracial kids, if they are half negro may or may not be violent. It's a roll of the dice, genetics-wise. So, if you're White why take the chance and mate with a darkie? You might end up with a violent kid that ends up attacking you. Best stick with one of your own when procreating, I say.

Image: Chart showing why Blacks are so violent and stupid... higher hormone levels and significantly smaller brains (much lower average IQs). Why are we wasting money sending these idiots to school? A better idea would be to get rid of the minimum wage and then put these thugs to work. I'm talking about hard manual labor jobs with White overseers to keep them in line (perhaps with whips).

Byline: This commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of racism. LLIN-280.

Lester Of Oz

This dude (Rational Nation), either doesn't believe me and thinks that I actually do read the nonsense he emails me OR he feels that I'll eventually break down out of curiosity. Either way he's wrong.

Having spent many years dealing with alzheimer's patients and working with and COMPROMISING with people I can say with the assurance drawn from experience that RN is most assuredly one of a kind. Best approach? Humor and ignore.

Lester of Oz has become quite... let's just leave it at delusional and perhaps suffering from drug induced hallucinations. That and he appears to have lapsed into mocking those he hates via his "Jersey McJones" sockpuppet.

Also the dude has been talking with himself at RNUSA for awhile now ("Jersey" comments and Lester responds). Lester of Oz had taken his place at the table with the strangest and most misdirected souls of our era I think!

Byline: This commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of unfacts. LLIN-279.

Rational Nation: What An Asshole!

I refer to the blogger who uses the moniker "Rational Nation", but whose real name is Lester Carpenter. Or, that's what he SAYS his name is, at least. Lately I've been thinking that his name might actually be Jersey McJones.

Jersey McJones is a hardcore Progressive lunatic. Oh, and he's also a sockpuppet controlled by Rational Nation! So, while previously I thought Jersey was created by RN for debating purposes (RN as Jersey would thrown out a ridiculous Leftist argument, then RN as himself would refute it), NOW I'm convinced that the true persona was represented by Jersey all along!

By which I mean that (while I thought) that RN used to be a fiscally conservative and socially tolerant anarcho-capitalist Libertarian (someone I was proud to consider a colleague) he was actually a hardcore progressive lunatic... FROM THE BEGINNING. By which I mean he was always an insufferable buffoon. He just hid it really well.

Which is quite amazing, given the fact that he wasn't able to hide the fact that Jersey McJones was a sock puppet. HIS sock puppet. This, a fact that even the low-functioning Tao was able to discern (which speaks volumes).

In any case, that is why I have reached the conclusion that Rational Nation is (and always has been) a total asshole. Seriously, fuck that guy.

Oh, and stop emailing me! One of the most infuriating things about this situation is the fact that he continues to send me unsolicited messages which make it very clear that he's a total wack-job! (hardcore Progressive screeds). Piss off, RN! I mean, how dense are you that you can't figure out I want nothing to do with you any longer?

Byline: This commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of unfacts. LLIN-278.

Thoughts On The Hardcore Progressive Blog "Rational Nation USA"

Apparently the proprietor, Rational Nation AKA Lying Lester, still insists that he's a Libertarian Gary Johnson voter. This despite the fact that he checks off all of the brain-diseased leftist boxes! I mean, he has clearly transformed from an anarcho-capitalist classical-liberal worshiper of Ayn Rand who despised Liberal Leftists into a hardcore Progressive.

I mean, just look at the dim bulbs who comment there - Octopus, Shaw, wd, Flying Junior, Jerry Critter, BB-Idaho, etc. The dumbest of the dumb when it comes to stupid brain-diseased Progressives. And then there is Jersey McJones! I refer to the sockpuppet controlled by Rational Nation himself! And, using that persona, RN writes as the true Leftist lunatic that he is!

Secondly, take a look at the issues he sides with the Left on. RN is with the looney Left when it comes to the totally discredited concept that says humans are the primary drivers of global warming. When the truth is that the small temperature increase over the last century is most likely a natural phenomenon. Most of it (the warming) being attributable to volcanoes and solar flares.

And RN is also with the gun-grabbing Left when it comes to their desire to grab the guns of law abiding citizens. Without due process and in violation of the 2nd amendment. RN likely voted for Hillary Clinton due to his strong agreement with her stated goal of repealing the 2nd amendment.

All of which causes me to believe that Jersey McJones was the true Les Carpenter all along and that the anarcho-capitalist chap was the alter-ego.

Byline: This commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of unfacts. LLIN-277.

Lying Lester (AKA Rational Nation) Is A Liar & A Total Wack-Job!

Yes, given the moniker he used when he used to write for this blog, I should have known that he is a liar. I just thought he was lying about something else. Turns out he was lying about who he is. Which is a hardcore Progressive and NOT an anarcho-capitalist classical-liberal worshiper of Ayn Rand who despised Progressives.

Which, from everything he wrote (getting into endless wars with Leftists on various blog-sites) he convinced me he was. But, as it turns out, he expresses his TRUE political leanings when he writes as Jersey McJones (his lunatic Leftist sockpuppet).

Which is why, after he has exposed his true self (checks off all of the brain-diseased leftist boxes), I banned his ass from my blog. Because I have no patience for people who lie about who they are. Also, I'm not willing to converse with Leftists. I used to allow these lunatics (think wd) to comment on my blog, but no more. I simply no longer have the patience for the virulent idiocy that is progressivism.

The most infuriating thing is that he continues to send me unsolicited messages while acting like a total wack-job. The guy is totally insane! Yeah, I'm thinking I should file a complaint with the server on grounds of harassment (because that worked out so well the last time).

Meanwhile I think I'm going to use that system I developed in order to not see wd submissions, which is to use a 4.5 x 5.5 cutout to cover the comments section but which allows me to see the author. Then, when I see the a Blogger ID I don't like (wd or Rational Nation) I can promptly delete their virulent idiocy.

Or, that is what I'll do if he tries to comment here. Which so far he hasn't. On my other blog, Contra O'Reilly, I restricted comments to "team members" only. What I'm talking about is email messages. For some reason RN keeps sending them to me. Frankly I'm a little concerned (as well as TOTALLY creeped out).

What a nut job! Perhaps he's suffering from multiple personality disorder? Or maybe it was an elaborate prank? Or (and I think this is the actual answer) he is a compulsive liar. I mean, he DID decide to call himself "Lying Lester". And (on this blog) admitted to being a confabulator. Although (like I previously noted) he said he was disembling about other things and NOT about who he was. Which was an anarcho-capitalist Ayn Rand-worshipping Libertarian. As opposed to a hardcore Progressive

Asshole. At least I got the last laugh by stealing this blog from him. Seriously that really pissed him off!

Byline: This commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of unfacts. LLIN-276.

On The Fact That Rational Nation Is Now Lying About Having Been An Anarcho-Capitalist

Lying Lester (AKA Rational Nation), the former proprietor of this blog says "I am not now, nor have I ever been an Anarcho-Capitalist Libertarian". But he's lying. Lester absolutely was an anarcho-capitalist!

But the TRUTH is that this is a fellow who went from being an anarcho-capitalist classical-liberal worshiper of Ayn Rand who despised progressives and who got into endless wars with them on various blog-sites to a person who now essentially checks off all of the brain-diseased leftist boxes.

It is one of the most bizarre political 180s (Anarcho-Capitalist Libertarian to Hardcore Progressive) that I have ever witnessed and it really makes me wonder if perhaps that lunatic Leftist sock-puppet of his (Jersey McJones; somebody that he created for debating purposes, I guess) was the true RN all along and that the anarcho-capitalist chap was the alter-ego.

Of course, the most infuriating thing for me is this insistence of his that I'VE CHANGED (which, yes, I have but only from a small l libertarian to a somewhat larger L libertarian - closer to what he used to be, in other words) and the fact that he continues to send me unsolicited messages while acting like a total wack-job. I mean, I understand that the blogosphere is primarily comprised of said rabble (hard-core conservatives and liberals, angry bozos, true-believers, partisan schmucks, etc.) but this episode stands out majorly from my viewpoint.

In many of these unsolicited messages Lester begs for me to allow him to write new commentaries for this blog. Apparently he thinks I owe him this because he's the one who started this blog? Think again Lester. Or should I say Jersey?

Contra O'Reilly Jersey McJones Sockpuppet Posts
[5/6/2015] On the Blogger Jersey McJones.
[8/11/2015] On the Obvious Sock-Puppet, Jersey McJones, Attempting to Tie Economic Growth to Inflation.
[11/25/2016] On the Fact that Even the Normally Low-Functioning Tao Was Able to Ascertain the True Identity of a Sock-Puppet Named "Jersey McJones".
[4/19/2016] On Going from an Anarcho-Captitalist Libertarian Who Worshiped Ayn Rand and Who Thoroughly Despised the Progressive Left to Somebody Who Essentially Signs-Off on Every Cockamamie Leftist Notion...
[6/23/2016] On the Curious Case of Rational Nation (and His Alter-Ego, Jersey McJones).

Byline: This commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of unfacts. LLIN-275.

On Those Who Won't Debate The Luminarias Islamophobe Sam Harris

If you're a non-Islamophobic media figure you should agree to debate the Islamophobe Sam Harris or STFU. Sam Harris, like me, knows that Muslim ragheads are awful. In that they're totally backward. By which I mean they hold views 100 percent incompatible with our values (rational Western Whites such as myself).

One such person (someone who refuses to debate the luminarias Harris) is Abby Martin, some bimbo journalist with a BA and a job on some marginal cable channel in which she spews forth nothing but paranoiac and condescending SJW bullshit. BTW, by "paranoiac" I mean that she truthfully acknowledges how our economic system is rigged to benefit the wealthy.

Although that's something wealth-worshipping stooges like myself like to keep on the downlow. So we deny, deny, deny. Because, if a problem is widely recognized to be a problem, then people might start demanding that their elected representatives do something about it. Which I (and my fellow wealth-worshipping buddies) absolutely do not want. Which is why my standard line of BS is that the system is NOT rigged.

In any case, Abby Martin might have a BA, but that in no way indicates that she's intelligent. I know for a fact that she has an IQ somewhere in the mid-90s. Although, to be completely honest, this is a "fact" I pulled straight out of my ass.

Still, I think it's likely that Martin is a moron. Because she won't debate Sam Harris. And, as everyone knows, the ONLY to determine who's right and who's wrong (when two people have opposing viewpoints) is for them to debate.

The lack of self-awareness here is staggering. I mean, does this slant-headed bitch actually think that she would stand a chance in a debate with Harris? ON ANYTHING? My lord, Harris is a genious! (a "fact" I know in the same way I know Martin is a mental midget).

And she's a woman, so that's another factor working against her. What with women generally not being as intelligent as men. And Leftist women (in particular) always (as far as I know) being deficient, brain-wise. They wouldn't be Leftists if they were smart. Duh!

Byline: This commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of Islamophobia and Misogyony. LLIN-274.

On The Fact That The Government Forced Minority Students To Attend UC Berkeley, UCLA, & UC San Diego

Did you know that enrollment figures for minority students at UC Berkeley, UCLA, and UC San Diego went down after Prop 209 (the measure which did away with racial preferences but NOT Affirmative Action) passed in California, while the enrollment numbers for the Irvine, Santa Cruz, and Riverside Campuses SKYROCKETED!!!

Gee, how shocking, people making better decisions for themselves (the fact that they ended up at colleges which were far more appropriate for their level of preparation) than the government did. Who'da thunk it?

Question is, why was the government forcing minority students to attend the more prestigious UC Berkeley, UCLA, and UC San Diego when they clearly belonged at the lesser Irvine, Santa Cruz, and Riverside? Fucking minority dumbshits.

Anyway, according to published data, graduation rates have been steadily improving over the last 20 years throughout the UC system, with little impact of Prop 209 on that trend. Which SOME might say points to a flaw in my logic - that minorities are being mismatched to schools they'd don't have the brains to attend. And thus they're dropping out (The effect of Prop 209 on UC admissions and campus diversity).

If that were the case, then shouldn't minority attendance declining result in a higher graduation rate (given that they're the ones who were dropping out)? But that isn't what happened. Proof "mismatch" is racist bullshit? Perhaps.

Actually, yes. But it's racist bullshit disguised as good research. Which it isn't. But I'll be damned if that stops me from insisting that it is. Or from dishonestly bashing Progressives for "hurting" minorities by advocating for such programs (because they've been proven to be effective).

The truth is that I don't give a shit because I'm a racist. Not that being a racist is a bad thing. That's just what the Left calls you when you acknowledge the FACT that the White man's brain is superior compared to the brains of people of other races. That's just science. Sorry, but yes.

BTW, when I said Prop 209 did away with racial preferences but NOT Affirmative Action, I totally lied. In that the two terms are virtually synonymous. If you're doing away with "racial preferences" you're doing away with Affirmative Action. I mean, that is exactly why the initiative was opposed by affirmative action advocates, for crying out loud!

As for anyone who didn't realize I was talking out of my ass? They're total dumbshits. But, hey, if I just say Prop 209 didn't do away with Affirmative Action? Perhaps some dumbshits will be fooled. Including dumbshits such as myself.

Byline: This commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of unfacts. LLIN-273.

On The Fact That Bernie Sanders Hasn't Conceded Yet Despite The Fact That The Schmuck Is Mathematically Eliminated

So not only does this guy know nothing about economics, he apparently can't compute, either. What an embarrassment. I mean, I knew Bernie Sanders was dumb, but how many of his followers know he's a fucking retard?

Sure, some say he's staying in until the convention so he can maximize his leverage. And yeah, that is a lot more believable than my narrative, which is that he actually thinks he can still win... but that won't stop me from spinning it.

Fact is I figured out awhile back that the dimwit should be living in some group home for mentally challenged persons. As opposed to being a senator running for Congress.

Byline: This commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of unfacts. LLIN-272.

On The Elegant & Original Photography Featuring Ballet Bitches & Circus Hos By Vermont's Jeffrey M. Lewis

While his subject matter is extremely varied and excellent across the board, I ask you to draw special attention to these ballet bitches and circus hos in that they are utterly amazing. I mean, they'd be even more amazing as nudes, but they're still pretty amazing! Please, check out his web-site. The prices are reasonable and the editions limited (the archive with all of his images).

Byline: This commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of Objectifying Women. LLIN-271.

Proof The Leftist Media Is Out To Get Trump

Did you know that Bill Clinton has received over $16 million in compensation for being the honorary chancellor of a diploma mill that has repeatedly been sued for fraud (something called laureate Education) - this while at the same time said enterprise's parent company has received $55 million dollars in grants from a Hillary Clinton led State Department? (source).

Likely not. Apparently our Leftist media doesn't consider it newsworthy. But isn't this just as bad (and maybe worse) as Trump University? Please? I know I'm praying that it is. Because if both DJT and HRC are charged and found guilty... can you say President Gary Johnson? Unlikely, sure. But when you reside on the farthest fringes ideologically (like I do), far fetched scenarios SOMEHOW placing your fringe candidate in office are all one has to cling to.

Don't get me, wrong - I hate HRC considerably more than DJT (he who has "offended" the Liberal media via a cadre of impolitic statements). Which is why I'd only vote for HRC if someone held a gun to my head. Sure, I wouldn't vote for DJT either, but that the Liberal media keeps attacking him (while ignoring Clinton transgressions) makes me so mad!

I mean, so the fuck what if Donald flat out ripped off people via his so-called "university"? I call it pigeon plucking, and have no problem at all if stupid people voluntarily decide to hand over their money. I mean, it's their fault if they don't do their homework. And, as a Libertarian, I am 100 percent in favor of education provided by the private sector on a for-profit basis (and do not believe these for-$ educators need any stinking regulation).

As for this applying to Laureate Education as well as Trump U... the answer is yes. But I'm going the hypocrite route on here and saying the Clintons should be hammered on this, while Donald should be given a pass. Even though, according to Jonathan Turley "there is no evidence of a quid pro quo arrangement or even direct grants" re Laureate's parent company receiving $55 million in grants from the HRC led State Department.

So, while the Clinton education "scandal" may be more unsavory as opposed to criminal, while Trump's fake "university" absolutely looks like a case of outright fraud, I'm still thinking the Clintons should be prosecuted and the Trump case dropped.

Does that Mexican judge have it in for Trump? I doubt it's because he's Mexican. But he clearly is prejudiced against savvy businessmen like Trump who are good at raking in the profits. And there's also the fact that Gonzalo Curiel was installed as a judge on the United States District Court for the Southern District of California after being nominated by... President Barack Obama!

This would be the same Obama who was the subject of allegations of not being US-born by Donald Trump. Which indicates that Trump being persecuted here might be a case of payback. I mean, since I'm already spinning unsubstantiated (Clinton-only) conspiracies, what's one more?

By the way, I noted near the beginning of my commentary that Laureate has been "repeatedly" been sued for fraud. Turley says this happened once, and the case was dismissed. Repeatedly or once, I say Laureate (and by association, the Clintons) are guilty as hell and should go to prison. Or at least not end up in the White House. Sorry, but no.

Byline: This commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of unfacts. LLIN-270.

On Donald Trump Saying We Need To Renegotiate Our Trade Deals

Is Donald Trump's economic illiteracy so profound that he's unaware of the fact that immigration doesn't just move the supply curve (pertaining to labor) but the demand curve, too? This is why wages are only pushed down substantially, but NOT pushed down (for the most part) dramatically.

I guess that they didn't offer Libertarian Econ 101 at the Wharton School during his tenure there (that or he took a regular Econ class). Yet another reason I'll be voting for Gary Johnson again. Because Gary understands that opening the borders will bring prosperity for all (all the people in the 0.1 percent, that is).

Gary Johnson: My vision of the border with Mexico is that a truck from the United States going into Mexico and a truck coming from Mexico into the United States will pass each other at the border going 60 miles an hour. Yes, we should have open borders. (Gary Johnson on Immigration).

This, to me, sounds like a VERY good idea. Because 42% of Mexico's total population lives below the national poverty line, while in the United States, only 13.2% of Americans are living in poverty.

Gary Johnson KNOWS the US can do better! By "better" I mean we can do a better job of transferring wealth from the lower classes up to the higher/better classes. Opening up the border would help the US move toward greater wealth disparity.

Although "recent census data shows that half the population qualifies as poor or low income" in the United States, so we're not doing that bad. But Donald Trump says we need to "renegotiate" our trade deals. Apparently so that some of those manufacturing jobs that were sent to China can come back here?

Yeah, that's something I say "no way" to. Because driving down American's incomes by outsourcing labor to low wage countries is a BIG part of the oligarch's plan to destroy the middle class. And, this is a strategy that's been in place for quite awhile, with both Republican and Democratic presidents and administrations working to further it.

Opening the border, on the other hand, is generally opposed by both parties. The Republicans being more fervert on this issue, however. Which is why Donald Trump proposed building a wall.

I mean, if we'd be fortunate enough to get Gary Johnson into the White House in 2017, perhaps we could move toward opening the borders (the "we" being those of us, like myself, who worship the oligarchs). But since that's probably not likely, continuing "free trade" seems the best course of action (to continue transitioning the US to neo feudalism).

But with Donald Trump as the Republican nominee? All I can say is WOW. This is surely NOT a good development. Hopefully HRC (is she is our next president) will flip-flop on the TPP (again).

Byline: This commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of unfacts. LLIN-269.

On The Fact That (According To A Pew Research Survey) 100% Of Willis Harts Are Seriously Islamophobic

Yeah, and there's nothing wrong with that, given the fact that (according to a Pew Research survey) 74% of the Muslims in Turkey, 85% of the Muslims in Malaysia, 93% of the Muslims in Indonesia, 82% of the Muslims in Pakistan, 78% of the Muslims in Lebanon, 77% of the Muslims in the Palestinian Territory, and 75% of the Muslims in Kosovo consider abortion to be morally wrong.

Not that I consider it to be morally right. IMO Planned Parenthood should be defunded. Because I'm opposed to my tax money being used to fund their profit making enterprise that involves chopping up babies and selling the parts.

Which causes me to ask, are the radical feminists fully down with this type of "diversity"? I'm kinda suspecting, uh, NO. Yet they defend Muslims when dudes like me go on the "attack". Attacks that are actually me (or anyone else on the "Islamophobic Right") just pointing out the facts concerning raghead barbarians.

Bring on Donald Trump's Muslim ban, I say. This is one area where I actually agree with the fella.

Byline: This commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of unfacts. LLIN-268.

On HRC Being Convicted Of Treason For Sending/Receiving Classified Info Via eMail And Being Sentenced To Prison Before The Election

It is absolutely going to happen.

No wait, the fix is in. Barack Obama commanded the justice department not to indict her. Yeah, that's the ticket.

Why didn't I think of this before when I said it was likely HRC would be forced to run her campaign from a prison cell?

Surely the reason there appears to be no indictment of Miss Hillary forthcoming couldn't be because "plenty of people in Democratic and Republican administrations made some mistakes in following protocol for emails [but, as per] the recent report released by the inspector general of the State Department... there is no Clinton email scandal".

Because if this were true, it would mean I was totally full of shit before. And me being CONVINCED that HRC was going to be charged was due to nothing but my misogynistic hate for HRC.

Sorry, but no. That was not the reason! Ronald Kessler (a 2-time winner of the Peabody award and an individual who has consistently criticized presidents from both parties) said that FBI director Jim Comey is a man of great integrity and would indict Hillary even if Obama didn't want him to.

I guess Obama got to him!

Byline: This commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of unfacts. LLIN-267.

On The "Black Africans Were Actually the Real Ancient Egyptians" Afrocentric Theory

I want you to think good and hard as to what these folks (Al Sharpton amongst them) are suggesting here. They are asserting that sub-Saharan Black Africans migrated north, created one of the greatest civilizations known to man, and then ended up back in Central Africa where they ditched all of this culture and knowledge and replaced it with primitivism (they didn't have the wheel, for Christ), tribalism, cannibalism, voodoo, and barely eking out an existence. It's an absurdity and it needs to be ridiculed. YES, ridiculed.

Because it's a fucking fact that Africoons have smaller brains. We ALL KNOW there is no fucking way Darkies could have been responsible for the accomplishments of ancient Egyptians. Scientifically speaking, it simply is NOT possible. Because Blacks are genetically inferior, for Christ! I mean, they're just as violent and primitive TODAY as they have always been!

I've heard some people say "we should have picked our own cotton", and I can't help but agree. Yeah, the crowd that says such things includes people who post on the StormFront website, but they have a very valid point (I HAVE to agree with my fellow racists here). Or realists. Calling Whites "racist" when the REAL racists are the Blacks being WAY out of line, IMO. Offensive, actually.

Byline: This racist commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of unfacts. LLIN-266.

Willis Hart Got Away With It

After being convicted of rape and sentenced to many years in prison, I am extremely pleased to announce that my retrial resulted in a hung jury, after which the prosecutor decided to drop the case! Yes, I spent some time in jail (where some Blacks roughed me up) and was facing some serious prison time. But that is all now behind me and I am a free man.

This reversal came about after I fired my lawyer and hired a chick to replace him. Sure, a chick lawyer isn't as good as a man lawyer, but a male rapist being represented by a chick gets some people thinking... if he's got a woman defending him, the woman must be convinced he didn't do it.

That's the strategy as presented by the chick lawyer who represented me suggested (to get me to hire her). Luckily it worked. That, and she attempted to get as many men on the jury as possible. A third crucial strategy (in getting me off the hook) was character assassination. My accuser came off as an absolute bimbo who committed both perjury (multiple times) and conspiracy to defraud.

Not that any of accusations as presented by my lawyer were true. But they did the trick. Although the double trial did cost me a pretty penny. I had to dip into my retirement savings in order to not end up in prison where I might have very likely been raped by a Black dude. How royally fucked up is THAT?

Perhaps one day I'll write a book. One possible title I'm kicking around being "How To Get Away With Rape". This would be a "what if" type of novel similar to the OJ Simpson "confession" If I Did It. Likewise I'd only be putting forth "hypothetical" accounts of the many rapes I've committed.

In any case, I fortunately have some cash left. I think I need a vacation after being put through the ringer with this trial, retrial and time spent behind bars. I might move or take an extended Oklahoman vacation. I heard that it was ruled that sodomy with an unconscious woman is NOT rape by one of their courts.

Like I've been saying all along... if two people are drunk and have sex... how the hell is that "rape"? And, if I find some woman, liquor her up, and then put my dick in her mouth after she passes out... why isn't SHE charged with rape?

Anyway, sounds like fun. I'm really looking forward to it.

Byline: This commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of unfacts. LLIN-265.

Is Trump A Hillary Planet?

I normally don't believe in conspiracy theories ("Michelle Obama is a man", "Paul McCartney died in 1967 and the guy portraying him now is an imposter", "we faked the moon-landing", "LBJ was behind the plot to assassinate JFK", "we're secretly concealing alien life in Roswell NM", etc.) but this sucker almost seems plausible.

BUT EVEN IF IT ISN'T, it might as well be. I mean, think about it. The guy is an absolute buffoon and totally unelectable, and in a political climate in which Mrs. Clinton herself is largely reviled, what better elixir could there possibly be? Seriously, I can almost see the two of them cracking jokes and having a cold one come December.

Hillary surely would lose if any other Republican had won the nomination, given that the bitch is a piece of shit. Also a woman. Yes, she lied to the Benghazi families and has a slush fund in the form of the "Clinton Foundation" (among other problems). But the bottom line is that she's a chick. And not even a hot one, which is why misogynists like me ultimately could never vote for her.

Why the people don't revolt (given the awfulness of both candidates) and elect Gary Johnson is beyond me. Sure, Gary Johnson would work to hard to get rid of a lot of the free stuff the moochers want, and that's going to cost him a LOT of votes.

Like Mitt Romney said, 47 percent of this nation is comprised of parasitic moochers who will vote for the candidate who promises them the most free stuff. Mitt, while a bad candidate, was absolutely right about that.

Anyway, we all know that Trump used to be a Democrat, donated to Hillary's previous presidential campaign and praised Planned Parenthood for their "good work" (chopping up kids and selling the parts). Also, he is currently opposed to free trade. Although he lies about that fact, saying he is a "free trader" but wants to "renegotiate" our trade deals.

Seriously? Free trade involves no "negotiation". The "deal" should be that corporations in different countries sell their goods anywhere around the world without restriction or tariff. American workers get screwed while multinational corporations profit. Big time. I say that not to criticize it, but to PRAISE it. Although Donald may be lying about this. In order to fool the dumb-dumbs.

Which there are many of. Stupid voters, that is. Which is why Trump might just win, despite me just saying he is "unelectable". But the current climate is very different. With the electorate being dumber than ever in recorded history. That's a game changer.

Think about it. The guy is an absolute buffoon and seemingly unelectable, but he's running against a woman. An old pantsuit-wearing hag that (even when she was young) was average looking at best. I mean, who wants a grandma as president" I know I sure as hell do not.

She might be doing a decent job of pretending to be a Progressive. But she's fallen short when it comes to promising free stuff (Comrade Sanders outdoing her in that area). So, it might not be enough. And what better elixir could there possibly be than a guy who plays to the misogyny and bigotry of angry White male voters like me? Seriously, I can almost see the Donald and his VP cracking jokes regarding the "poorly educated" dupes who hand him the election come December.

Byline: This commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of unfacts. LLIN-264.

Ragheads As Violent & Criminally Inclined As Africoons

Did you that, while Muslims only make up about 4% of the population in Spain and France, they comprise 70% of the prison population (source).

It has to be the result of all those bigoted Spaniards and Francs, no (my tongue firmly planted in cheek)?

So, what's the REAL reason the percentage of ragheads in European prisons has gone up so sharply?

In 2010, the then Chief Inspector of Prisons, Dame Anne Owers, published a report on Muslims in jail, in which she linked the growth in numbers to the age and socio-economic profiles of the Muslim population in general. "Both are powerful predictors of involvement in the criminal justice system", she wrote, "and Muslims in Britain have a notably younger age profile than non-Muslims and are more likely to come from lower socio-economic groups". Amal Imad, a researcher for the charity Muslim Aid, agrees with Dame Anne's findings from five years ago that poverty - in particular not having enough money to feed a family - is a key factor driving crime, and therefore imprisonment, among Muslims. (Why the surge in Muslim prisoners? by Danny Shaw. BCC News 3/11/2015).

Makes sense, right?

NO! It's complete bullplop. Obviously the cause is their smaller brains. Frankly, I'm of the opinion that lesser races such as Ragheads and Africoons should be classified as subhuman. I mean, I think this term is appropriate given the fact that these violent fuckers are clearly inferior to Whites.

BTW, you might wish to point out that "Raghead" isn't a race. To which I say... OK, then, Arab. Or Persian. Not that it makes any difference, given that they're all inferior. I mean, who really gives a shit when it comes to lesser races like Muzzies, Africoons, Wetbacks, etc? They're all criminally inclined. That's just genetics.

Byline: This pro-White commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of unfacts. LLIN-263.

Taxation Is Theft (Takers Stealing From Makers Via The Democratic Process)

Karl Marx frequently referred to profits as theft but never referred to taxes as theft. Can you fucking believe it? So that which is taken through the barrel of a gun and coercion ISN'T theft but entrepreneurship, ingenuity, vision, and risk-taking through a series of voluntary associations IS. Man, was that dude ever fucked in the head.

BTW, that taxes are taken through the barrel of a gun and coercion is absolutely true. Rich folks never voluntarily pay their taxes. Or, perhaps SOME do. I've heard that many resist, and that's when the jackbooted thugs are sent out to grind their bootheels into the throats of their rich victims.

This happens everyday, given the fact that resisting muggings are human nature. Especially if they happen time and time again. Usually on April 15th of every damn year! What I'd like to know is what the hell makes the State think it has the right to steal from citizens? Now, I know you're probably going to tell me that the 16th amendment gives the State this right (specifically the right to assess and collect an income tax).

And, if you do make this argument I'm going to have to admit that you're right. However... uh... I've got nothing. Which isn't to say that taxes STILL are not teft. I mean, they aren't, but that isn't going to stop me from saying they are. Because... Libertarian?

Also, apparently pointing out the fact that you never signed the social contract is not an acceptable reason to not cough up the State's protection money? Pay up or you'll go to jail? Seriously?

Although, unless you're for anarchy, the government needs some money to operate. For a police force to keep the violent Blacks from stealing from Whites, at least. But I say poor people should pay. They're the ones committing most of the crime, so it only makes sense that they should be the ones to pay.

Instead the Democrats think the poors should be given lots of free gifts? While the rich Makers shoulder most of the tax load? Not paying their fair share? Clearly they're paying WAY more. Which has GOT to stop, IMO.

BTW, in regards to profits being theft? The Left might say that, given the fact that pay is negotiated between employers (who have all the power) and singular employees (who are in oversupply, thus not in a position to demand much in pay). Excepting situation in which there is a union, of course. Unions put the worker in a position in which they can negotiate for a higher wage, despite the oversupply of labor.

But stealing from workers is an employer's RIGHT, IMO. I'm talking about Natural Rights. Rich people get more of them due to them being rich. The State, representing "the people" is like a union of all citizens. This is the primary aspect of collectivism that Democrats support and Republicans oppose. Republicans opposing it for good reason. Which is because it is evil.

I mean, an institution that attempts to equalize (to some small extent) the power of poor/middle class people with that of rich people can only be viewed as evil. At least by rational people, given the fact that poors stealing from richers (via the State) is wrong, while richers stealing from poors IS THEIR RIGHT! Or, their Natural Right, to be more precise.

Byline: This commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of unfacts. LLIN-262.

The Darkest Period in Human History?

Yeah, I'm gonna go with the FDR presidency. Under this tyrant the top tax rate on our beloved wealthy Makers was increased to a mind-boggling 94%. This asshole even had the gall to suggest that rich folks should pay 100% after earning 350k (in today's dollars)! Which is obviously peanuts. Enough for a middle class loser to get by on, but clearly not enough for a worthy rich man to live in style. I mean, you've got to have enough to pay your servants.

As a runner up "darkest period" I'm going with when the gorgeous, delightful, and talented Polly Pergen left "To Tell the Truth" in 1961 and was replaced by the dumpy, acerbic, and difficult to watch Peggy Cass. What a fat uggo! IMO only good looking women should be allowed on TV. I'm even opposed to having uggos in "character" rolls. "Character actor" being code for unpleasant in appearance. Only men should be character actors, I think. I mean, why subject your audience's eyes to unnecessary pain?

The brightest period in human history? It might surprise you, but my selection is the years 1346 to 1353. This would be peak years of the Black Death. The Black Death being "one of the most devastating pandemics in human history". The disease swept Europe, killing an estimated 75 to 200 million people, or 30–60% of Europe's total population.

So, why do I consider this to be a "bright" period? Because (as I pointed out in a prior commentary) the Black Death raised the standard of living of many survivors who inherited estates from the plague's victims. Not that I necessarily care about the living standard of worthless poors. No, but that millions of these parasites were exterminated is a "good" that would surely have made Ayn Rand smile.

Rand would absolutely agree that poors going to an early grave when there is an overabundance of them is a positive, and definitely something that should happen at least once in awhile. I mean, we want their numbers to be high enough so that the price of labor is low, but not so high that they consume too much resources (think a plague of locusts).

There is also the possibility that, if they become too numerous and if their living conditions become too horrid (especially compared to their wealthy superiors) they could rise up. The execution of the Romanov family being but one historical example of a revolution of the lower classes leading to the deaths of superior wealthy people.

Something that might have happened under FDR if the wealthy individuals that the tyrant FDR plundered had resisted, given the fact that (ultimately) the theft of money from rich people (in the form of taxes) is extracted via the barrel of a gun.

Which is pretty fucked in the head if you ask me, given that the wealthy earned their money via entrepreneurship, ingenuity, vision, and risk-taking through a series of voluntary associations. Yet they're the criminals if they don't pay this protection money.

Byline: This commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of unfacts. LLIN-261.

Dylann Roof Was Right

Dylann Storm Roof, the young man who killed 9 African Americans at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, said he did it because he wanted to ignite a race war.

Clearly his hope that a race war would break out was nuts. Roof did, however, have legitimate grievances concerning the accurate and honest reports concerning black-on-white violent crime.

For example, in regards to White on Black rape, robbery, and aggravated assault, the rates are so small that they all but don't exist (see table 42 on this page). If only it was the same in the other direction.

As opposed to it just being a anecdote. According to a National Review article by Heather MacDonald, "An honest appraisal of race relations today would conclude that the Charleston massacre belongs to the outermost, lunatic fringe of American society... White-supremacist killings are not a common aspect of black life today; their very rarity is what made this atrocity so newsworthy".

It is also a fact that (according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Crime Victimization Survey, and the FBI) 85% of the interracial violence in the U.S. (560,600 of the 660,003 total incidents) is Black on White. But I'm going to assume that Obama and Holder aren't going to want this in the "conversation".

When you figure in the population differential, the odds mushroom all the way to 27 to 1. My conclusion? There's racism in America alright; Blacks hating Whites being the bulk of it. So, yeah, I've got to acknowledge that Dylann Roof was right. Even if he chose the wrong target - a church full of peaceful Blacks who welcomed Roof (a White man). Obviously this is not the norm.

White on Black violence being anecdotal, while Black on White violence being just everyday life. Something the majority of these Black animals engage in on a regular basis (attacking the hated Whitey). Which explains why so many of them are behind bars (where they belong).

For this reason (me hating Black people), some might refer to me as "racist". Honestly, I have to agree with them. However, my "racism" is only in response to the Black man's racism. As well as their stupidity and violence. Clearly White are superior. That's a just a fact, and if you want to call it "racism"... so be it.

"You rape our women and you're taking over our country" Roof said in regards to the many wild Black Animals who are running rampant. And he was absolutely RIGHT. As for a race war, the Black are already waging one on us Whites... and they're WINNING! Roof fought back. Yes, against the wrong people (some of the rare good Blacks), but you've GOT TO give him some kudos for trying.

And perhaps a race war is what is needed? Because an end to the assault on the White race will, I think, only come about via force. Violence being the only thing these animals respond to. Although by force I don't mean (necessarily) through violence but rather by changing our policies to A) allow police officers to shoot to kill when these animals riot, and B) by locking up the Black criminal class and throwing away the key.

Or we might NEED an actual race war. Although only as a last resort, I'm saying.

Byline: This commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of unfacts. LLIN-260.