...he knows she's burned if she crosses him?
This is way out in left field, but Noem has been stacking up Ls for a few years. Caving to the NCAA over the tranny bill, rumors of an affair, and (strangely enough) shooting a dog. With her current resume her career is pretty shaky after the governorship. Trump is extending her a way to burnish her credentials, and if she bucks his leadership she'd be committing political suicide.
Normally you'd expect someone who cucked out for the NCAA to cuck out over mass deportations, but Noem probably has more to lose by opposing Trump. It's not like she's actually a bleeding heart lib. I mean, she shot her dog.
By the way, the anti-ZOG crowd has been very annoying recently twisting Tom Homan's statements on mass deportations. Vance laid all this out in interviews. Agents are not going to be out there rounding up every illegal man woman and child immediately, because that would be retarded. The last American mass deportation of Mexicans didn't look like that. Even the Nazis didn't do that to the Jews. Anyone can tell this if they have a few brain cells to confer with, so I assume these people are just trying to build a narrative after Trump appointed a Zionist cabinet.
Maybe this isn't that big of a deal, but I think it's one of the wilder things he's posted. Hilarious
Read a tweet today about why Gen Z men are not "manning up" and cold approaching women. It's obviously the fear of getting your life ruined, not the fear of rejection.
This is established fact for virtually anyone who's ever thought about the subject (besides NPCs).
But my thought is even if you somehow took away the risk of ruining your life, there are a lot of problems with expecting men to find relationships by walking into the buzzsaw of cold approaches over and over. First of all, it kind of hurts to get turned down based on your physical appearance, and the appearance of 80% of men is inadequate on its own. You can make up for that with banter and flirting. But is it realistic to expect every man, or even most men, to develop the level of game needed to pick up girls off the street?
Second, most attractive women you see on the street already have a boyfriend. Not a meme boyfriend, an actual dude. Now it is true that if you're Timothee Chalamet you can probably turn half of those women into cheating hoes, but why would you want to given that you're going for a serious relationship? In the end it's just very awkward for both parties to go through the script again and again. "Sorry, I have a boyfriend." [forced smile] "Oh, my bad sorry"
In the past women were somewhat more likely to take cold approaches as a compliment. Disclaimer: somewhat more likely. Today the infinite choice of online dating has more than filled women's thirst to be admired, so getting approached in public mostly makes them annoyed for the same reason that most people prefer to be emailed rather than called.
There is a way for guys who aren't male models to be attractive to women: get to know them in a mutual community so their appreciation of your positive features overcomes the "ick" and "he's not a kpop boy band member" factors that they initially notice. People can also figure out who's in a relationship and who's looking without embarrassing themselves. This form of courtship, coincidentally, has been attacked by each successive sexual revolution.
I'm generalizing in several places, but I doubt that most relationships are going to happen through cold approach in a healthy society, whether that's in person or on a Jewish dating app.
We exaggerate the commitment of libs to their cause. Your average antifa member might be a jobless trust fund kid rioting in five different cities a month, but only because Soros affiliates pay him a stipend and make sure any charges are dropped. Without the vast institutional backing behind him, he's just another average schmuck. Maybe the most ubiquitous lie millennials were told is that civil disorder is organic. In fact, you mostly get what you pay for.
The hood black demographic can talk a big game, too, but they're in the same boat. First of all, their entire worldview is a Jewish creation programmed onto an 80 IQ brain. Second, it's actually very easy to deal with rioters and criminals: send them to prison. Unbelievably, the biggest problem in NYC for several years was "overzealous" cops arresting people for illegal cigarettes and jumping subway turnstiles. Not mugging, not people getting pushed in front of trains, not thugs walloping Steve Buscemi and Asian grandmas.
So how come the old Giuliani regime crumbled if it worked so well? Simply put, the media and the universities. Unfortunately for libs, the Trump years have irreversibly hollowed out the credibility of both.
Bottom line, these people aren't any harder than your average facebook boomercon. In fact, seeing how the Jan 6th prisoners have kept the spirit alive in the gulag, the average boomercon is probably tougher than them. If they're staring down the barrel of years in prison, they're going to shut up real quick.
Great hook to the story. Manga writers are sometimes really good at making you feel the pressures on the protagonist and this chapter is a great example of that. The main character, Nomamato, is a 17-year old girl who can't make enough money to eat while recently landed aliens are enjoying prosperity and what seems to be an enforced privilege in society.
Nomamoto meets a guy named Kitami who dislikes aliens even more than her. Long story short, he ends up killing an alien and she gets the bright idea to eat it, since apparently they taste like squid. The speed of the conflict might be a problem. It definitely gets your attention, but the manga could be in danger of running out of road in the future because it used up its ideas too quickly.
I love the 90% realism art style on the cover. It works really well for Chainsaw Man. Just a fantastic style. The art in the manga itself is more stylized, but still good. Nomamoto is pretty cute and very crazy.
Obviously this isn't a traditional heroic story, but that doesn't hurt its potential at all. Chainsaw Man and JJK are the biggest hits in the last 5 years and one of them is a massive antihero story while the other isn't far behind. JJK is a really interesting failure at the end of the day, but Chainsaw Man is still going strong. I don't believe at all that this is going to "flip on the chuds" as I saw some people posting - I'm sure the aliens aren't completely villainous but if there is indeed more than meets the eye to the story about the aliens saving the Earth from an asteroid, then they are definitely not going to be revealed as "the good guys all along." Also alien life is framed too cavalier for this to be the case.
Nomamoto and Kitami aren't heroes, and might not even be antiheroes, but the one thing that's established is they have legitimate grievances (unless he was lying or deluded about an alien killing his family, which I doubt). Maybe the story will be a Heart of Darkness-style descent into madness, but their grievances will always be there.
You participate in a game show where you must choose between 3 doors. Behind 2 doors is a goat, but behind 1 door is a car. You pick a door, say door no. 1, but before you open the door, the host opens another door, say door no. 3, which has the car behind it. "Oops," says the host.
You lose.
Based. Apparently the potato in a wig was arrested
Somewhat related: neighborhood Karens make up stories about Fuentes. The "your body my choice" line was a real heater.
- no marriage
- no childbirth
- no dating
- no sex with men
These women are radioactive and since they want to quarantine themselves, they should be encouraged. In fact, we need to start telling prog women to become 4B. We can call them 4bitches.
I'm completely serious. This is perfect judo. It destroys their power, makes them miserable, and deprives prog men. It's as effective a political weapon as you're ever going to get.
I would like to add a fifth bullet point though:
- no posting photos for men
Leather Apron Club, who makes great videos, released his election day message recently: if you're a conservative, don't vote. Basically it's a takedown of various boomer talking points for voting (civic duty, lesser of two evils, can't complain if you didn't vote, etc).
The problem is, the boomer talking points are not the reality of voting. The vote is an exercise of power that, while virtually meaningless on an individual level, advances group consensus.
"Voting for a candidate endorses 100% of their platform."
- This is simply wrong and frankly a naive statement. No need to elaborate on this, just look up Bush's term after he thought he won a "mandate" with his 2004 reelection.
"Voters are dumb cows who don't even know who's in power or how it's exercised."
- Largely true. Problem is, you will need a majority of those cows on your side to effect any meaningful political change. Voting for a cause orients them in a general direction.
"The Republican party keeps getting more liberal"
- While this is true on paper, if the only paper you read is campaign press releases, anyone paying the slightest attention to the Overton window since Trump became a national figure should be able to perceive that the right is actually moving farther right. The true liberal "softening" of the GOP was in the 2000s and early 2010s.
"Trump backed off on abortion"
- Trump gave you the repeal of Roe v. Wade, something I thought was unlikely in my lifetime. Any counterpoint to this is disingenuous.
"Trump supports Israel and he's in bed with the neocons"
- The only way to end the current wars is to make peace with the respective stronger party in each: Russia and Israel. Any suggestion that Trump has gone neocon is risible.
"Reading a book or volunteering or getting a government job is a better political action than voting"
- No. Beyond the stated purpose, voting is a measure of allegiance to a particular direction. It's arguably one of the most tenuous, but it galvanizes half the country into conflict with the deep state. Without conflict, there is no movement. Without awareness, nothing is possible.
People are designed to move in groups. Groups create change. Reading a book or whatever is predicated on the idea that intellectual power will be the primary lever at some point down the line, which approaches utopian thinking.
Vote. Use the tool at hand to take action.
Yesterday some dude posted a video to shame apparently Indian gas station owners charging $10 a gallon around the Hurricane Helene disaster area. The lolberts answered with rebuttals that free market pricing is the best rationing mechanism in a time of scarcity.
People are saying that the gas station could ration gallons per customer and keep the same price, and the lolberts are saying this is communist price control.
I'm not really sure how much merit is held by either position since I've never really thought about this with respect to a disaster area. Clearly the 1973 price controls were a bad idea, but this is a debate over what a private business owner should do after a hurricane. My gut feeling is that gas should be rationed by customer, not by pricing. But maybe the gas station is passing along supply chain pricing to a certain extent?
edit: Texas punished gas price gouging in 2019 after Hurricane Harvey.
Tucker recently had an alternative historian on his show (Darryl Cooper, who runs the Martyr Made podcast) to expound on his view of the genesis of WWII, namely that Winston Churchill was a villainous figure. His twitter thread made after the show does a decent job of summarizing that point.
Obviously any suggestion that Hitler was not 100% Satan incensed the boomer right, provoking febrile emotional reactions like this one from Billboard Chris. The likes of Seth Dillon are also making their favorite call for "moral clarity," which I just read as "die for Israel" these days.
At the same time, a couple people made some decent counterpoints, namely that Hitler invaded a lot of countries at the time he was supposedly suing for peace. This is the problem with calling Churchill "the chief villain," which Cooper walked back into "a chief villain" on X.
Overall, the controversy is a good thing for the right. Tucker is softening up the ironclad boomer mythology of WWII - when you delve deeper into the motivations of the belligerents, you eventually delve into the question of, "so where did the Nazis get all this animus against Jews?" and "why is the Holocaust the greatest tragedy when 14 million Asians were killed by Japan and 20 million Ukrainians were killed in the Holodomor?" Also, blue laser eyes/red tint profile pics are gay.