District of Corruption
Harry Reid and the Democrats keep their promise …
… just not to end the wars, cut the deficit, repeal tax cuts for the rich, balance the budget, reduce unemployment, or bring the jobs back from overseas.
Harry Reid and the Democrats had more important priorities like threatening to keep the Senate in session through Christmas for homosexuals can serve openly in the military.
Note: In case you have already forgotten, Reid also tried to deliver another gift wrapped present to White America just in time for Christmas, a massive amnesty for millions of illegal aliens, but fortunately for us he was thwarted on that front in the cloture vote.
After lying to get elected, Obama drops the mask:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/23/AR2010122301859.html?hpid=topnews
Twice this week, President Obama suggested that he might become the first sitting U.S. president to support gay marriage. He said his views on whether same-sex couples should be allowed to marry are “evolving” and added that, although he is a longtime supporter of civil unions, “I recognize that from their perspective, it is not enough.”
But none of this means that the White House is about to launch a national legalize-gay-marriage campaign. . .
With the electorate overwhelmingly concerned with job growth and economic issues, it seems likely that Obama would focus on gay marriage only if he wins reelection in 2012. During a second term, he could ostensibly pursue the issue with far less political risk.
@ Hunter
The repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” had little to do with the military, and everything to do with mainstreaming homosexuality in Federal Law & Practice.
That’s about it. The Eternal Jew, ever on the look-out for yettanother group-entitlement that can be controlled via special privilages and debt-financed handouts. Then use it, along with all the others – blacks, browns, feminoids – to corrupt and destroy Western Civilization. Nonetheless, Vengeance will be ours, and soon.
After so many years of reading and researching the origins of the politics, ideas, ideologies, movements and people that have caused our catastrophic decline of race and civilization, I cannot help but to have noticed that it turns out that at least 3/4 of the people who have been the primary “movers and shakers” of that endeavor have been queers. I therefore think that homosexuality may actually be the primary motivation of the assault on white Western Civilization.
Homosexuality or bisexuality seems to be almost natural in all other races, despite the strong sanctions and penalties they impose on themselves ( e.g., Muslims executing those caught in homosexual acts), and the alleged social stigmatizing of “outed” men ( it is said, anyway, that blacks, Mexicans and so called “Native Americans” shame and shun male members of their races when they are caught, though this is hard to reconcile with the rampant homosexuality among blacks). And of course it is otiose to discuss the relationship of Jews and homosexuality.
Our civilization and society has simply not been compatible with homosexuality. It was illegal and socially ruinous, and queers hated it for that reason. They hated the necessity of being secretive in their sexual liaisons and even common socializing with others of their kind. They hated that healthy white men held them in contempt and considered them essentially a disease. This hatred has simmered down through the centuries and at every possible chance queer hatred has boiled over in the form of either outright violence or gross exhibitionism.
Up to the very early 20th century, the rage and outbursts of homosexuals was kept in check and severely punished whenever the line was crossed, but then the long awaited window of opportunity was finally raised. The Bloomsbury Group was when wealth and extraordinary intelligence came together into a fist of power to deal a blow from which we are still struggling to rise up off the mat. I shall now quote Zygmund Dobbs, a member of the Veritas Foundation:
“Singing the Red Flag, the highborn sons of the British upper-class lay on the carpeted floor spinning out socialist schemes in homosexual intermission. Sometimes, one of the participants would shout out an obscenity – then, as if on signal, the entire group would join in a frenzied babble of profanity. Here and there individuals would smoke or chew hashish. Most had unkempt long hair, and some sported beards.
The attitude in such gatherings was anti-establishmentarian. To them the older generation was horribly out of date; even superfluous. The capitalist system was declared obsolete, and revolution was proclaimed as the only solution. Christianity was pronounced an enemy force, and the worst sort of depravities were eulogized as “that love which passes all Christian understanding.”
The year was 1904, and the participants were destined to become the intellectual and political leaders of the British Empire.
Chief of this ring of homosexual revolutionaries was John Maynard Keynes, who eventually became the economic architect of English socialism and gravedigger for the British Empire. The chief American Fabians, acting as carriers of the Keynesian sickness, were Felix Frankfurter and Walter Lippmann. Covertly, they mobilized their Leftist comrades to spread this pollution in America also. So successful were they that on January 4, 1971, President Nixon announced: “I am now a Keynesian in economics.” What does that mean?
Keynes was characterized by his male sweetheart, Lytton Strachey, as “A liberal and a sodomite, an atheist and a statistician.” His particular depravity was the sexual abuse of little boys. In communications to his homosexual friends, Keynes advised that they go to Tunis, “where bed and boy were also not expensive.” As a sodomistic pedophiliac, he ranged throughout the Mediterranean area in search of boys for himself and his fellow socialists. Taking full advantage of the bitter poverty and abysmal ignorance in North Africa, the Middle East, and Italy, he purchased the bodies of children prostituted for English shillings[See Lytton Strachey, A Critical Biography, Michael Holyroyd, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, two volumes].
Such Leftist hypocrites then, as now, issued loud denunciations against poverty, imperialism, and capitalist immorality. However, for their own degenerate purposes, they eagerly sought out the worst pockets of destitution and backwardness to satisfy their perverted purposes through sexual enslavement of youngsters. While traveling in France and the United States they complained among themselves of the harassment by the police of practicing homosexuals. In degenerate areas of the Mediterranean, on the other hand, they found a pervert’s Utopia where the bodies of children could be purchased as part of a cultured socialist’s holiday.
These Leftist degenerates began to scheme over sixty years ago to secure public acceptance of their depravity. Havelock Ellis, a founder of the Fabian Society, compiled a massive erotic work entitled, Studies In The Psychology Of Sex. Ellis was a sexual pervert and drug user. He and a group of fellow Leftists even pioneered in the experimental use of hallucinogens in private orgies. Ellis was definitely a pathological case. He drove his wife into Lesbianism and drug addiction, securing additional erotic excitement by urging her to recite her Lesbian experiences. Mrs. Ellis eventually went insane and died in utmost misery after denouncing her husband as a sexual monster.
The Fabian socialists used the writings of Ellis as a wedge for sex education in the schools. They started in the colleges and gradually eased into the high school level. Ellis complained to his fellow socialists fifty-five years ago that he found wider acceptance for his books in the United States than he did in England. In fact, he was arrested and tried for obscenity in England, whereas his books were sold here without serious interference by the authorities. Today, his perversions are standard reference material for the sex educators, and Havelock Ellis is popularly called “the father of social psychology.”
Keynes and his cohorts seized upon the works of Ellis as justification for their depravities. They were also greatly bolstered in their campaign by the theories of an Austrian Leftist named Sigmund Freud. Dr. Freud acknowledged in private correspondence that he copied the thesis of sex as the central determinant in human action from Havelock Ellis. Echoing Ellis, he laid down the premise that homosexuality and carnal depravities are not a matter of abnormality, but merely a case of personal preference. This, plus his declaration of atheism, overjoyed the socialist Keynesian crowd. John Maynard Keynes audaciously proclaimed, “Sex Questions are about to enter the political arena.” He inveighed against “the treatment of sexual offense and abnormalities,” adding the charge that “the existing state of the Law and of orthodoxy is still Mediaeval – altogether out of touch with civilized opinion and civilized practice and with what individuals, educated and uneducated alike, say to one another in private.”
During the same period (1925) Keynes struck out against drug control. He laid down the line which has been pursued by Leftists to the present day in demanding that distribution of narcotics be unrestricted. Homosexuals find drugs a useful adjunct in loosening moral inhibitions to perversion. And this ravisher of little boys feigned sympathy for the masses by urging universal rights for users of narcotics. He declared: “how far is bored and suffering humanity to be allowed, from time to time, an escape, an excitement, a stimulus, a possibility of change?”
Keynes and his conspirators projected homosexuality and drug addiction as an intrinsic part of their collectivist society of the future. His male sweetheart, Lytton Strachey, wrote privately that they would corrupt the whole population, “subtly, through literature, into the bloodstream of the people, and in such a way that they accepted it all naturally, if need be without at first realizing what it was to which they were agreeing.” He boasted that he intended “to seduce his readers to tolerance through laughter and sheer entertainment.” He pointed out that the object was “to write in a way that would contribute to an eventual change in our ethical and sexual mores – a change that couldn’t be done in a minute, but would unobtrusively permeate the more flexible minds of young people.” J. M. Keynes put it in the terms of Marxist economics:
“When the accumulation of wealth is no longer of high social importance, there will be great changes in the code of morals. We shall be able to rid ourselves of many pseudo-moral principles which have hagridden us for two hundred years….”
Keynes and Strachey used their malignant writings to help contaminate the entire English-speaking world. In the United States they both found expression in the New Republic, the New York Times, and the Saturday Review Of Literature.
In 1939, a comrade of Keynes and Strachey named Bertrand Russell came to America to push their obscenitarian socialism and was (he says in his Autobiography) legally charged as “lecherous, libidinous, lustful, venerous, erotomaniac, aphrodisiac, irreverent, narrow-minded, untruthful, and bereft of moral fiber.” His aborted object had been to permeate the College of the City of New York with the corruption of the British Fabians. Immediately, John Dewey and other American Fabians organized to cry that “Academic Freedom” was under attack. The National Education Association (NEA) and the whole Leftist educational complex began to percolate pervasive degeneracies as being “Liberal” and “progressive.”
The works of Keynes, Lytton Strachey, and Bertrand Russell have been, and are today, required reading in almost every college and university in the United States and Canada.
In the spring of 1905 Keynes and his lavender cohorts had been thrilled by a conference of Russian revolutionaries in London. British Fabians and Joseph Fels, an American soap manufacturer who was also a Fabian, had financed the Russian gathering and furnished them a hall in a Christian church. Key revolutionaries at this London conference included Nikolai Lenin, Leon Trotsky, and Joseph Stalin. The future slaughter of fifty million civilians, and the conquest of one-third of the earth’s surface. rested within the shelter of this gathering. Shivers of excitement rippled down the spines of the socialist homosexuals when they heard that Lenin had openly defended the slaughter of bank guards and stealing of bank funds for the bolshevik coffers. During this time Strachey wrote to one of his intimates: “At this moment Keynes is lying on a rug beside me.”
Keynes and his fellow debauchees became active pacifists and conscientious objectors during World War I. The socialist position against military service dovetailed perfectly with the homosexual aversion to any kind of physical danger and the manly requirements of military training. Yet, in spite of Keynes’ sheltering of “queer conchies,” and his own refusal to serve his country, he was made the head of an important division of the British Treasury. During March of 1917 he confided privately that he supported the bolshevik group among the Russian socialists after the overthrow of Czar Nicholas.
The seizure of power by the bolsheviks in November of 1917 elated Keynes and the rest of the Fabian coterie. At Leftist parties in London, Keynes and his fellow perverts celebrated by dressing in women’s clothes and performing lewd dances. He had as his consort an eighteen-year-old-boy who was ensconced as his assistant in the Treasury Department.
Just before the Bolshevik Revolution, Keynes had made a hurried trip to the United States for the British Government. Here he had a chance to make contact with the American Fabians who were similarly entrenched, via the Frankfurter-Lippmann group, in key positions of the Wilson Administration.
Even the House of Morgan in New York City’s financial district trotted out its sissies to welcome Keynes to this country, and gave him an office just for himself. The international grapevine had established the nature of his proclivities. The urbane air of Keynes sent thrills of excitement through the ranks of the financial “giggle gang.”
Keynes’ deviate socialist circle was almost completely pro-bolshevik. One month after the Revolution, J.M. Keynes wrote his mother”
“Well, the only course open to me is to be buoyantly bolshevik; and as I lie in bed in the morning I reflect with a good deal of satisfaction that, because our rulers are as incompetent as they are mad and wicked, one particular era of a particular kind of civilization is very nearly over.”
On February 22, 1918, Keynes proudly boasted of “being a bolshevik.” Yet the British Government blindly sent Keynes to the Versailles peace talks. There he joined forces with his Fabian American comrade, Walter Lippmann, who was among those representing the equally blind U.S. Government. The ensuing pro-bolshevik and anti-American machinations were largely responsible not only for laying the basis for continuing Red victories, but also for setting off the chain of events that eventually brought Hitler to power.
In 1919 Keynes authored The Economic Consequences Of The Peace, which was promptly acclaimed from Moscow by Nikolai Lenin, himself. The Red dictator declared: “Nowhere has the Versailles treaty been described so well as in the book by Keynes.” A special edition of The Economic Consequences was printed under the label of the Fabian Society; and, Frankfurter and Lippmann brought the manuscript to the United States and arranged with Harcourt and Brace to publish it here. The volume became required reading among American socialists and Communists.
However, Keynes’ value as a hidden Red was in danger. The Fabians had developed the posture of “respectability” to a fine art and the value of Keynes’ book as an “impartial work” was in jeopardy. With Keynes’ future usefulness in upper-class circles at stake, Lenin had personally come to the rescue. He pulled the classic Leftist double-twist, praising Keynes’ book as a model for Communist revolutionaries and at the same time covering for Keynes by labeling him as “anti-bolshevik.” Nikolai Lenin rose before the Second Congress of the Communist International and declared:
“I will quote another economic source which assumes particularly great significance, the British diplomat Keynes, the author of The Economic Consequences Of The Peace, who on the instructions of his government, took part in the Versailles peace negotiations, watched them directly from the purely bourgeois point of view, studied the subject step by step, and took part in the conference as an economist. He arrived at conclusions which are stronger, more striking and more instructive than any a Communist revolutionary could advance, because they are conclusions drawn by an acknowledged bourgeois….”
Thus was launched the career of Fabian leader Keynes as a “non-Leftist” and “non-Communist.”
In 1925, John Maynard Keynes was married. It was a bizarre performance. His best “man” was Duncan Grant, his male lover for many years, and initiates swear that Keynes held Duncan’s hand as the marriage vows were spoken. But, the background of the bride was equally odd. She was Lydia Lopokova, the premiere ballerina of the Diaghilev Ballet. She was an habitué of Leftist circles, and had at one time been engaged to Heywood Broun, the well known socialist and confidant of Leon Trotsky, but had broken the engagement to marry a dwarf named Barocchi. In 1917 Lydia had disappeared in Paris with the top Cossack general of the White Army, returning to the ballet when the general returned to lead his troops against the bolsheviks. The bolsheviki had by now, however, acquired advance information and used it to defeat the Cossacks.
Following the wedding to Comrade Lydia, Mr. and Mrs. Keynes were the special guests of the Soviet Government. He and his Russian wife were allowed free access to the Soviet hinterland, even to the extent of visiting her relatives. This was a privilege unheard of at the time, since even members of the Communist International were not then allowed such unlimited travel. It was a time of mass killing of civilians, and ordinarily a Russian national traveling with an Englishman would have been arrested and shot. But, Soviet officials were effusive in their thanks to Keynes for designing the first Soviet currency for them while he was still a member of the British Treasury.
The marriage was definitely an “arrangement,” as Keynes continued to enjoy his amours with men. This was often the case with upper-class homosexuals who needed a legal wife as a facade. They both had separate living quarters, and did not interfere with the personal lives of one another. Lydia was very useful as a go-between since Keynes was in frequent contact with Soviet officials both in Britain and the United States.
Meanwhile, the perversion continued apace. It was quite a pace. As I have noted in the new edition of Keynes At Harvard:
Keynes had relations with Strachey; Strachey had affairs with Duncan Grant; Keynes stole Grant from Strachey; Lytton’s brother James Strachey adored Rupert Brooks but so did Keynes; Strachey reports to G.E. Moore on seduction of new boys; Keynes steals Edgar Duckworth from Lytton; Keynes and Lytton agree that homosexuality is, “that love which passes all Christian understanding”; Strachey emulates Oscar Wilde with absinthe and drugs; He also declares that, “the whole truth is the Devil”; He predicts that in one hundred years, “everyone will be converted,” to homosexuality; Strachey and Keynes promote obscenitarian talk in colleges; Lytton lives with Dora Carrington, a Lesbian; Carrington solicits homosexual partners for Lytton; Keynes, Lytton and Carrington have orgies involving Lesbian and sodomistic interchanges; Keynes and Strachey dress in women’s clothes and dance; Keynes and Strachey give a sanctuary to homosexual objectors to military service thus frustrating the authorities; Keynes defends the use of drugs and Strachey smokes hashish; Carrington married several men so they could be Strachey’s boy-friends; Lytton stole Sebastian Sprott from Keynes (the tables were turned); Lytton excuses his drug taking as a liberation from, “this wrong world.” Finally, there are engrossments by Keynes and Strachey with sadistic beating of young boys, “compulsive pre-occupation with male reproductive and excretory organs” and voyages to the most depraved dens of perversion throughout Europe, North Africa and Asia.
The Fabian homosexual circle was incredibly successful in gaining influence and control in a wide area of activity. They staked out the entire British Empire and the United States as well. Lytton Strachey wrote to Keynes:
“Oh dear me!, when will my heaven be realized? – My Castle in Spain? Rooms, you know, for you, Duncan and Swithin, as fixtures – Woolf of course, too, if we can lure him from Ceylon; and several suites for guests. Can you conceive anything more supreme! I should write tragedies; you would revolutionize political economy, Swithin would compose French poetry, Duncan would paint our portraits in every conceivable combination and permutation, and Woolf would criticize us and our works without remorse.”
This projection was incredibly prophetic. J. M. Keynes became the mastermind behind the economic structure of British and American socialism. Strachey was responsible for writing books that undermined the Christian ethic of the Nineteenth Century and set the tone for the pornographic and depraved literature of today. Leonard Woolf worked out the details of the socialist drive for World Government. He was not only the architect of the League of Nations but outlined the structure of the United Nations.
Others of this perverted group of Keynesians have set the tone in art, music, education, and religion. Today [1971], alas, even the President of the United States says: “I am now a Keynesian in economics.” It is disgusting!”
Brutus: As I wrote on another post, you don’t have to persecute queers, but they bear watching. A healthy society will slap them down if they get out of line. No more trustworthy than Jews.
I cannot help but to have noticed that it turns out that at least 3/4 of the people who have been the primary “movers and shakers” of that endeavor have been queers.
Newton was probably gay. So was Alexander and I think Caesar swung both ways. You have to take the good with the bad, I guess.
I think if we give gays everything they want they’ll shut up. Gay marriage and DADT repeal are totally worth it to me if it means I don’t have to listen to them bitch about how oppressed they are.
Otis: The Homintern likes to claim as many notables as possible for their side. Just like they have been claiming for decades that 10% of the population are fags, they multiply the facts by five.
The border between madness and genius is sometimes blurred. The stereotypical “mad genius” does exist. These men obviously lack a barrier in the brain, something to prevent them from crossing the borders of decency. It might be that this “border mechanism” is also missing in the creative department?
Either way, I think that the proper response is to let them exist, and take advantage of any creativity they have, but to vehemently fight their ability to adopt children, “marry” etc.
The repeal of DADT will allow gays to form a clique much easier than prior to its repeal, and IMO it will be the most virulent of the “diversity cliques.” Forget about a generalship if you don’t make their grade, but the same goes for the Israeli cult that holds sway right now over who gets a generalship.
The post 9/11 culture might have saved our military from Euroweenie irrelevancy because it saved it from the beauracratic nightmare of the previous “diversity” experiments and their beauracratic webs. This assuming that they needed white men as leaders to actually fight a war.
Lets face it our military is now the Chicago city hall.
To say that one is a Keynesian in economics, simply means to be in favor of using public spending to even out economic trends. Raise taxes in good times to prevent an overheated economy and put the money in a “rainy day fund”. Spend that fund in a recession (thus maintaining employment and demand) in order to make it less severe and shorter. That’s all. Geez…
Other than that, it was an interesting description of Keynes’ life.
Seeing the picture of the “American” officer with Reid, I remember something that was on my local news yesterday; taped Christmas messages from local soldiers. One Hispanic female who spoke proper English, one Hispanic male who spoke with a moderate accent and one (probably) Korean who’s accent was so thick that I pity those who have to interact with him over a radio or under fire. Sad and dangerous. The Korean was a Staff Sergeant, too!