Ronald Reagan on why immigrants make America great: “You can go to live in France, but you cannot become a Frenchman. You can go to live in Germany or Turkey or Japan, but you cannot become a German, a Turk, or a Japanese. But anyone, from any corner of the Earth, can come to… pic.twitter.com/sp4TlvHvsp

— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) December 26, 2024

It doesn’t surprise me, but I hadn’t seen it. Ronald Reagan gave a speech about how diversity is our greatest strength and how anyone in the world can become an American.

Reagan is seen as the avatar of conservatism. Every single one of these people references Reagan. He was actually a horrible persona and a horrible president.

So I’m not surprised he did the “anyone can be an American” thing.

The requirement to become an American?

To believe in freedom.

Have you ever heard of a person who is “against freedom”?

Even in North Korea, Kim gives speeches about the importance of freedom.

Everyone on earth is pro-freedom, in the same way everyone on earth is pro-food.

If believing in freedom means you’re an American in waiting, then everyone on earth is already an American, they are just waiting to get their papers.

That means America is not actually a country. I don’t think it’s right to say it’s “an idea” either, because that doesn’t even make sense. It’s not an idea, it’s a place. Ideas are not physical objects in the way a mass of land is. But if everyone on earth has a right to become an American, and therefore de facto already is an American, there is no such thing as an American.

What they will try to say when you say a country can’t be an idea is that members of the nation hold a set of ideas and that’s what defines them as part of the same nation. It’s nothing to do with race. And it’s not ideas around religion. Or any kind of politics.

These same people will say “Americans can disagree with one another.”

You just have to believe in freedom, and you can define that freedom however you want.

I don’t know why Reagan was a saint to the boomers. I read a short book about him years ago, but it was written by a leftist. I know he deregulated everything and there were some good things about that along with all of the overwhelmingly negative things about that. Like, sometimes when I’m depressed, I watch 1980s cartoons, and before Reagan, most of these cartoons were illegal because they were advertisements for toys and advertising to kids was regulated.

I think mainly it was just an incredibly wealthy period in American history which happened to coincide with the collapse of communism. It was the beginning of the boomers lighting everything on fire and just burning it all down.

And the poison ideology that “everyone on earth is an American in waiting” is really at the core of boomerism. The boomers were a very selfish people, and they really liked goofy, saccharine feel-good gibberish like “America is the greatest country on earth.”

Yeah, people really didn’t like Ronald Reagan.

Breitbart:

A concert featuring John Hinckley, the man who tried and failed to assassinate President Ronald Reagan, has sold out in Brooklyn, according to reports.

Hinckley, who shot President Reagan and three others in 1981, is set to perform at the Market Hotel in Brooklyn, New York, on July 8, and according to Mediaite, the $20 per-seat venue is now sold out.

The failed assassin, who served more than three decades in prison for the attempt to kill a president, now claims to be a singer-songwriter and has more than 26,000 subscribers on Youtube.

The hotel and Hinckley announced the concert only six days ago.

Big news!! I will be performing on July 8 at the Market Hotel in Brooklyn, NY. Get your tickets while you can.

— John Hinckley (@JohnHinckley20) April 8, 2022

Unsurprisingly, Market Hotel garnered backlash for hosting the event. Still, the hotel defended hosting the Hinckley concert saying that he “paid his debt to society,” and pointed out that other “indie musicians” also have violent pasts.

The man served 40 years in prison / mental health treatment, paid his debt to society. Several darlings of indie music had mental health issues + committed violence / tried to kill people. Daniel Johnston for instance attempted murder more than once and tried to crash an airplane

— MARKET HOTEL (@markethotelnyc) April 9, 2022

Hinckley made himself infamous when he approached President Reagan and his entourage near the Washington Hilton in March of 1981 and began firing a handgun toward them.

Hinckley fired six shots, wounding Reagan, press secretary James Brady, and a Secret Service agent, and a police officer who were both on the president’s security detail.

James Brady suffered critical, debilitating wounds that ultimately led to his cause of death in 2014.

As to the president, Reagan was not shot directly by Hinckley but was struck in the chest by a bullet that had ricocheted off the side of the presidential limousine.

Reagan, who was only in the second month of his presidency, was struck in the left lung by the projectile, causing his lung to collapse. He nearly died from the wound.

…

John Hinckley was found not guilty by reason of insanity and spent more than 30 years in a psychiatric institution.

He was released to his mother’s care in 2016, and by Sept. of 2021 was ordered released from all restrictions to start in Sept. of 2022.

I really hope Jodi shows up.

Can you believe it’s been over 40 years and this bitch still hasn’t answered his letters?

Cuckservatives are in shock as a recently released tape proved their hero Ronald Reagan to be a nigger-hating racist.

In a call with Richard Nixon, Reagan referred to black people as “monkeys from those African counties” and said “they are still uncomfortable wearing shoes.”

Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConell said: “My chink wife and I respected Ronald Reagan so much we got married on his birthday. But this monkey comment invalidates everything else that Ronald Reagan did. I now dissociate myself from Ronald Reagan entirely. I reject Ronald Reagan. I denounce Ronald Reagan. My wife and I are now seriously considering getting divorced then re-marrying on Harriet Tubman’s birthday instead.”

Jonathan Greenblatt of the ADL declared: “Across America, streets are named after this racist; statues are raised to honor this racist’s memory; institutions and facilities are named to glorify a racist. This shames America, and it will not stand.”

Greenblatt suggested that the aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan be renamed the USS Leo Frank to commemorate a Jewish rapist and murderer who “should have got off fair and square” when Jewish power was used to secure his liberation. “This plan failed because of racists like Ronald Reagan,” said Greenblatt, with some bitterness.

He also proposed that Reagan National Airport be renamed “Levison National Airport” in honor of Stanley Levison, a friend and adviser to Martin Luther King Jr., who, according to Greenblatt, “wrote all of King’s speeches, told him what to say and do, and ran his whole operation. The Jews deserve the credit for this. It’s time the truth was told.”

British Cuckservatives are reeling from a similar blow when a recent BBC documentary revealed that Winston Churchill planned to run for re-election in the 1950s under the slogan “Keep England White.”

Asked for comment by the Daily Stormer on the recent revelations about Churchill and Reagan, British conservative philosopher Roger Scruton said: “The ethical standards currently championed by elite classes within our culture are ones which almost no person born outwith the last few decades is capable of meeting. One thinks, for example, of Elizabeth [the First, Queen of England] who ordered ‘blackamoores’ to be rounded up and ‘sent forthe of the lande.’ Almost all the great men and women of our past would fail the ‘Woke Test.’ So either our entire previous civilization is invalid or our current ethical standards are. I’m afraid one of those things must be true.”

Trump: "Russia used to be the Soviet Union. Afghanistan made it Russia because they went bankrupt fighting in Afghanistan. Russia."

Trump then goes on to endorse the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Via Fox. pic.twitter.com/oE0fuDLXyz

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) January 2, 2019

A Soviet invasion of Afghanistan?

Now that’s a war of aggression I can get behind!

RT:

Offering an explanation of why US should withdraw from Afghanistan, President Donald Trump appeared to endorse the Soviet intervention there in the 1980s and by extension, disavow US support for jihadist insurgents.

“Russia used to be the Soviet Union. Afghanistan made it Russia, because they went bankrupt fighting in Afghanistan,” Trump told reporters on Wednesday, following a cabinet meeting at the White House.

Arguing that Russia, India and Pakistan were all in Afghanistan’s neighborhood and should fight terrorism there rather than expecting the US to, Trump offered an impromptu history lesson.

“The reason Russia was in Afghanistan was because terrorists were going into Russia. They were right to be there,” he said. “The problem is, it was a tough fight. And literally, they went bankrupt.”

Trump’s apparent endorsement of the Soviet intervention did not sit well with his critics, who exploded in outrage and called it an abandonment of Ronald Reagan’s values and policies.

Muh Ronald Reagan.

Muh Jews.

It seems impossible, but it's true: President Trump just endorsed the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979. Who's he working for? https://t.co/vRMfr3hQ8W

— David Frum (@davidfrum) January 2, 2019

David Frum, you filthy fucking kike.

In his rambling WH discourse, @POTUS just said regarding #Afghanistan that "the Russians were right to be there" -suggesting they were going after terrorists not, in fact, advancing their #EvilEmpire. This contradicts the assumptions of not only Reagan & Bush, but even of Carter.

— Michael Medved (@MedvedSHOW) January 2, 2019

Michael Medved, you filthy fucking kike.

"The reason Russia was in Afghanistan" was because of terrorism. "They were right to be there." (So, POTUS overlooks the USSR's communist invasion of Russia as part of Moscow's Iron Curtain foreign policy & offers the, presumably, Putin line on it was about terrorism.)

— David M. Drucker (@DavidMDrucker) January 2, 2019

David Drucker, you filthy fucking kike.

#history pic.twitter.com/E5WUue2bDS

— Benjy Sarlin (@BenjySarlin) January 2, 2019

Benjy Sarlin, you filthy fucking kike.

How dare you cite Rambo III. Rambo supports Donald J. Trump.

Imagine that it is all Jews giving this same response.

The average goy would respond to this with “hm, interesting historical perspective, I was not aware of these informations, I will Google these things when I get a chance, perhaps on my phone next time I am having a bowel movement.”

Jews on the other hand freak the fuck out.

MUH REAGAN MUH OSAMA BIN LADEN FOR FREEDOM MUH PROTECTING THE CAVE PEOPLE

Interesting.

Jews also say that their hero, who they do the whole “HOW ABSOLUTELY DARE YOU SIR” thing to Trump over insulting did 911.

And then after they said he did 911, they told us we have to fight infinity wars to protect them… or to stop Iraq from invading America… or whatever.

This whole shit is just so in your face obvious, and yet apparently, the NPC meme is real and people simply cannot process the idea that this is fucking stupid.

Yes, my dear sweet child: Jews lie to you. 

The media is claiming Trump’s history here is wrong. It is actually exactly correct. The USSR invaded Afghanistan because Afghanistan was on its border arming terrorist uprisings in shitty central Asian shitholes. Then the US government armed Osama bin Laden to fight the USSR. The Russians spent ten years and however many billions of rubles in Afghanistan, walked away with nothing, and that whole debacle played a major role in the overall insolvency of their Union.

The Jews are literally mad because this implies perhaps that Osama Bin Laden was not a good person.

If you don’t read anything else today, check out this article in The New Yorker on Big Business and its crusading for social justice:

“When you think about the role that big corporations play in American life, fighting for social justice is probably not the first thing that comes to mind. Yet many corporations are doing precisely that in the ongoing struggle over the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. This year, legislators in at least twenty-five states have proposed more than a hundred bills limiting L.G.B.T. rights, often under the guise of protecting religious freedom; North Carolina, Georgia, and Mississippi have passed laws that, in various ways, make anti-L.G.B.T. discrimination legal. In an effort to roll back these laws, and prevent new ones from being enacted, some of America’s biggest companies are pushing a progressive agenda in the conservative heartland.

Last month, executives at more than eighty companies—including Apple, Pfizer, Microsoft, and Marriott—signed a public letter to the governor of North Carolina urging him to repeal the state’s new law. Lionsgate Studio is moving production of a new sitcom out of the state, Deutsche Bank cancelled plans to create new jobs there, and PayPal has cancelled plans for a global operations center. In Mississippi, G.E., Pepsi, Dow, and others attacked the law there as “bad for our employees and bad for business.” Disney said that it would stop making movies in Georgia, which has become a major venue for film production, if the governor signed the bill. Something similar happened last year in Indiana, after the state passed a religious-freedom law allowing businesses to discriminate against L.G.B.T. customers and employees. At least a dozen business conventions relocated.

A little corporate muscle flexing can work wonders, it turns out. Last month, Georgia’s governor vetoed its religious-freedom bill, implicitly acknowledging that the state could not afford to lose Disney’s business, and South Dakota’s governor, citing opposition from Citigroup and Wells Fargo, vetoed a law that would have required people to use the bathroom that corresponded to their biological sex at birth. Last year, Indiana and Arkansas amended their religious-freedom bills after a corporate backlash (led, in Arkansas, by Walmart). …”

The most dangerous myth in American politics is the widespread belief that there is such a thing as the “Reagan Coalition” that unites social conservatives, national security conservatives and fiscal conservatives in a “three-legged stool” that makes up the mainstream conservative movement.

In reality, there is no such coalition, or it is one where one partner is kept out of sight in the basement. The social conservatives vote for the “shares my values” candidates like Ted Cruz. They have given mainstream conservatives control of Congress, the Supreme Court, and unified control of nearly every Southern state government. They controlled the White House too under George W. Bush. This empowers mainstream conservatives to push through their pro-business economic agenda on behalf of their donors.

Big Business, however, operates in a coalition with the most radical SJW activists on the Left. Bank of America and PayPal threaten the North Carolina legislature. Coca-Cola and Disney threaten to abandon Georgia. Wal-Mart uses all its economic power to influence Arkansas. Alcoa sends threatening letters to the Tennessee legislature. When it comes to immigration, the US Chamber of Commerce uses all its power to push for amnesty for illegal aliens in concert with the Democrats. Even worse, major corporations tow the SJW line in hiring practices and monitor the political activity of their employees.

There is no coalition between “social conservatives” and “fiscal conservatives” when the latter constantly use all their economic weight and power to defeat the agenda of their so-called “allies” in league with the opposition.

Nancy Reagan’s death is the top news story today. I don’t find it to be an especially important story, personally.

I’ve never understood making the lead news story an old person’s death, generally.

I also don’t really care about Ronald Reagan. The cucks are obsessed with him like they’re obsessed with fetuses and Israel, but the reality is, the economic success of his administration had a lot more to do with circumstances than he himself.

I would also just generally assume Nancy was not a very great person, given that she raised a gay son. Gay sons are usually the mother’s fault.