Those who attempt to utilize agit prop for human rights, as if such a thing exists, will be crushed by the TSA, SEIU, ATF< IRS + everybody else combined

Certainly if people have power enough to fight the government, they can. But they don't. So they won't.

History shows, over and over again, that no trend or regime lasts forever. People were saying we should normalize relations with the USSR and stop fighting them — they were Here To Stay — then the whole house of cards collapsed. In a matter of days.

Besides why make it any easier for the rat bastards?

Whether a conservative Court could stop Obama at this point is not the issue. I don’t know what could stop him at this point. But a conservative Court would have a fighting chance of stopping him and a good chance of at least slowing him down or making it harder for him. But none of that is the issue you and I have been discussing on this thread.

The issue we have been discussing is whether Republican appointees to the Court would make for more conservative decisions. There is no question that they would. And it could very well end up mattering very much.

So far, fortunately, Obama has not appointed any SCOTUS justices in his second term. But there is a good chance he will, and if he does, there is no question it will be a liberal rather than a conservative or even a swing-vote.

A Republican-nominated Court would hold the line against Obama’s worst excesses. Whether that would be enough to stop him–I doubt it, but it would help.

Well, there you are. Since Obama has nothing but contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law, it wouldn’t be enough to stop him. He would simply ignore any decisions that go against him, and issue executive orders to get his way. And Congress seems incapable of reining him in. They are supine, and are becoming increasingly impotent and irrelevant.

I believe we are past the point of being able to fix this with elections. Or, to quote Artfldgr again, we crossed the event horizon in 2008.

Anybody who believes we can get past race and live in a color-blind society is delusional. They (Obama, Holder, et al) haven’t even begun to exact the payback they are intent upon exacting.

That is absolutely correct. The term “social justice” means one thing and one thing only: Revenge.

It is essential that white people begin to think and behave in explicit terms of White racial pride and White racial solidarity. We have no choice, because everybody else is doing it.

The Left has spent decades demonizing white people and blaming us for all the evil in the world. Generations of nonwhite people have been systematically taught to hate and resent us. And plenty of whites have fallen victim to the propaganda of self-hatred and self-debasement. Obama could never have been elected otherwise.

Immigration “reform” seems to have the object of reducing the political power of whites. I constantly hear predictions that we will be a minority in America by mid-century. That is not inevitable. If it happens, it will be the result of deliberate policy.

If white people ever do become a minority, we will be stripped of our property, our rights, our freedom, and ultimately our lives. It will all be done in the name of “social justice” by people who will be convinced of their own righteousness.

As Artfldgr has said, white people are not the Volk in the New Order that is being built.

You are incorrect.

Look at the Republican nominees on the Court right now: Scalia, Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Kennedy. The rest: Sotomayor, Kagan, Ginsburg, Breyer, are Democratic nominees.

The Democrats never waver (or virtually never waver) from the extreme liberal party line. If there were nine of them like that (Democratic nominees), the Court would be FAR more liberal than it is now. Far.

Three of the five Republican nominees are reliably and consistently quite or even very conservative. The other two, Roberts and Kennedy, are mostly conservative (Roberts, at least till recently) and a swing justice who’s conservative in about half his decisions. If all nine SCOTUS justices were similar in proportion and ratio of very conservative to somewhat conservative to these five Republican-nominated justices, the Court would be very reliably conservative.

I am tired of people reflexively knocking Republicans and Republican nominees as just the same as Democrat and/or liberal ones. They are not. They are actually very different; not every single one, not every time, but in the vast majority of cases. And it would make a huge difference. A Republican-nominated Court would hold the line against Obama’s worst excesses. Whether that would be enough to stop him—I doubt it, but it would help.

You are angry at RINOs and what you consider squishy nominees. I’m not happy with that myself. But you are letting your anger get in the way of your thinking, IMHO.

First of all, Roberts had decided quite a few cases perfectly fine before that; that one was an anomaly for him, although a highly crucial one.

“Highly crucial” is putting it mildly. He had the chance to largely strike down Obamacare. That he didn’t essentially negates every other decision he has made. This is the one he’ll be remembered for, and not kindly.

Sotomayor and Kagan, and the rest of the liberals, would not be on the Court today if there had been a Republican president at the time they were appointed. And the entire tenor of the Court would be far more conservative, Roberts or no Roberts.

No. “Far more conservative” is wishful thinking. All the recent historical evidence indicates that a court made up of Republican nominees would be moderate at best, and liable to go either way in a given decision.

The Republican Party had better get their act together right quick, or I predict they will lose the House in 2014. After which this discussion will be moot, as we will be living in a permanent one-party state.