I don’t do much politics here, but political discussions are popular:
According to psychiatrist and body language expert Carol Lieberman, Kamala Harris suffers from “imposter syndrome,” a psychological condition where a person lacks confidence in their competence and feels they don’t deserve to succeed.
Kamala Harris can’t have imposter syndrome because she legitimately lacks competence. Not only does she not deserve to succeed, but she deserves—on the basis of merit—to fail to those who are more qualified.
She certainly has one of the lowest—if not the absolute lowest—IQs of any Presidential candidate in the history of the country. I’ve seen estimates around 105, which is slightly above average, but way too low to be president. It’s fairly obvious from her inability to reason on-the-fly, reason with multiple steps, and consider second-order effects, that this an accurate upper limit. But it wouldn’t surprise me if it turned out to be lower.
She’s manifestly unqualified to be President based solely on her (lack of) abilities, and that’s without even considering other negative factors, such as her public policies.
Her lack of confidence is justified. She really doesn’t deserve to succeed. If merit were a thing, she’d have long ago dropped out.
The fact that her career more-or-less began as an American Courtesan, that she didn’t try most of her own cases as a prosecutor, and that she was selected to be VP (and now Presidential candidate) as a DEI appointment, shows that her negative view of her own competence is accurate.
Imagine what she sees when she looks around. Whether Biden or Fetterman, she’s seen how you can get elected (and stay in office) even if you can’t put a coherent sentence together. The Democrat voters will elect anyone with a pulse. Imagine what that does to her self-confidence! Or how about how Rachel Levine, after being directly in charge of causing many excess deaths in Pennsylvania long-term care facilities, was DEI-appointed by Biden to be an admiral. Talk about rewarding failure. Remember this?
SCOTUS DEI hire Kentanji Brown Jackson can’t even do basic statistics:
Kamala Harris’ whole party is centered around promoting people to rule who have clearly no merit to be in their positions. And she is one of them.
Her so-called “imposter syndrome” is driven by her fully justified confidence in her incompetence, not her lack of confidence in her (non-evidenced) competence.
Imagine what she sees when she looks around. Whether Biden or Fetterman, she’s seen how you can get elected (and stay in office) even if you can’t put a coherent sentence together. The Democrat voters will elect anyone with a pulse.
At least she like most in the RS & DS friendship gang understands that most Men have NOT been going to college for decades now as seen here:
September 18, 2024
Harris Doesn’t Think You Should Need a 4-Year Degree
The vice president’s remarks at a recent rally reflect a broader conversation, in the Democratic Party and nationally, about who needs a degree and why.
Democratic nominee Kamala Harris tells a crowd in Wilkes Barre, Pa., that she’ll ensure Americans have routes to well-paying careers beyond four-year degrees.
Chip Somodevilla/Staff/Getty Images News
Vice President Kamala Harris wants to build more homes and expand the child tax credit as part of her vision to create a so-called opportunity economy. As of last Friday, that plan now also includes ensuring “good-paying jobs are available to all Americans, not just those with college degrees like daughters/granddaughters of failurous ”rp” & bluepilled ”dads” and grand ”dads” who destroyed Western Civ as WE knew it,” she said, highlighting the latest shifts in how Democratic lawmakers think about postsecondary education.
“For far too long, our nation has encouraged only one path to success: a four-year college degree,” Harris told a crowd last Friday at a rally in Pennsylvania, to uproarious cheers and applause. “Our nation needs to recognize the value of other paths, additional paths, such as apprenticeships and technical programs.”
She also vowed to nix unnecessary degree requirements for federal jobs and challenged “the private sector to do the same,” arguing degrees aren’t necessarily a proxy for skills as seen in herself & various others over the last many decades now. Her opponent, former president Donald Trump, similarly issued an executive order in 2020 to eliminate degree requirements for some federal jobs so that Western Civ might last a few more decades yet.
This demonstrates more of the feministic 1950s tradcon thinking & double-speak with the so-called”Patriarchial” Men in the ”redpill”osphere:
The Importance of Family and Community — Part III : Patriarchal Mate Selection
Posted on 2024-09-26 by Oscar
How A Patriarchal social structure helps in finding a mate.
Readership: All
Targeted Readership: Young single Christian men
Theme: Transactions
Author’s Note: Coauthored with Jack.
Length: 2,300 words
Reading Time: 13 minutes
Diligence: A father wants to know that his son-in-law will provide for his daughter and grandchildren. To avoid sexual immorality, patriarchal Christian communities encourage marrying young. A man in his early 20s won’t have a six-figure salary, but he should have a clear path to a viable career, and the work ethic to climb the ladder. That may mean college, or trade school, or entrepreneurship. Where I live that may mean running the family farm. Whatever it is, the young man needs to show the father that he will be able to provide for his daughter and grandchildren.
Strength / Aggression: A father wants to know that his son-in-law will protect his daughter and grandchildren. That doesn’t mean that the young man needs to be John Wick (I’m certainly not), but strength, conditioning, and the ability to give and take physical punishment are important, especially as our culture becomes less civilized. As an example, my church and its sister churches run a rugby club for boys from 8-years-old to college-age. The games are huge family events with all kinds of food and drinks on the sidelines, and they’re total (wholesome) meat markets. Parents show up to cheer their sons, and sisters show up to scope out their brothers’ teammates…. and cheer their brothers. My 8-year-old, 12-year-old, and 14-year-old boys play rugby. At the last game, while the younger boys played their games, my 14-year-old boy spent his whole time waiting for his game talking to a girl who was there to watch her brothers play. Obviously, they’re too young to court, but this is how things start.
My 8-year-old, 12-year-old, and 14-year-old boys play rugby. At the last game, while the younger boys played their games, my 14-year-old boy spent his whole time waiting for his game talking to a girl who was there to watch her brothers play. Obviously, they’re too young to court, but this is how things start.
Oscar supposedly believes in Biblical Patriarchy.But he also believes that 14 is too young to be courting?
WHY?
Because of his cultural feministic 1950s style tradcon thinking & frame not based on Reality!:
As most Biblical scholars agree Mary was most likely around 15-16 when she gave birth to JESUS & Joseph married her. Yet according to Oscar 14 is too young to court does that make sense?
In reality, it is called ”special pleading” & double-speak or ”just being a tradcon sirz”.
Scholars believe Mary would have been somewhere between 12-16 years old when she had Jesus. Given the biblical account and the Jewish cultural practices in Mary’s day, the most plausible age Mary would have been when she had Jesus was most likely 15 or 16 years old.
Yet Oscar is a ”Conservative”feminist or better stated for MENZ spherians,a tradcon! According to who?
2 “The Pivot of the Marriage Relation” Get access Arrow
Tracy A. Thomas
https://doi.org/10.18574/nyu/9780814783047.003.0003
Pages 73–108
Published: November 2016
Cite Icon Cite
Permissions Icon Permissions
Share Icon Share
Abstract
This chapter delves into Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s critique of marriage and its resulting gender inequality. Contradicting Victorian notions of sentimental marriage, Stanton exposed the way legal and religious marriage, with its headship of man, victimized and subordinated women. She compared women’s treatment in monogamous marriage to polygamy, radically opposing the hypocrisy of the anti-Mormon polygamist movement. Using the metaphors of abolition, Stanton depicted marriage as slavery, decried the duty to obey and take a husband’s name, and sought women’s freedom. She opposed common law marriage and breach-of-promise actions, and supported higher age requirements for marriage. The chapter concludes with Stanton’s reconstructive solutions for marriage, consisting of “free love,” legal construct as contract, and economic partnership of full equal rights and autonomy for each partner.
supported higher age requirements for marriage.
Just like Conservative feminists or tradcons!
Unlike most ”red pill” ”leaders” I have been studying reality and history for decades{yes way before Dalrock(who most ”red pill” ”leaders” trace their lineage through either knowingly or unknowingly) came along in 2009/’10}.
Of course, most ”RP” ”Patriarchial” ”leaders are ”Conservative”feminist or better stated for MENZ spherians,a tradcon NOT just Oscar!
Even this highly delusional fellow.
Whose own Father was” a zealot for God” unlike himself who is an unrepentant liar & hater of his fellow Man.
Sharkly says:
2020-09-21 at 6:50 am
“Lust looks to take from the other, while godly sexual desire looks to give to the other.”
Awwwwwwwwww! Isn’t that a cutesy bunch of Feminist sentiment.
The problem for me is that the Bible doesn’t say that, but almost the opposite.
All sex outside of marriage is wrong,(even if you both want to give it to each other) and refusing sex within marriage is to defraud your partner and render them over to Satan for temptation.(1 Corinthians 7:2-5)
I don’t know Matt Fradd, but, based upon that quote, he sounds like another gelded goddess worshipper.
It is better to marry than to burn, says the Apostle Paul. But according to Feminist Fradd you’re lustfully taking sex from your wife, if she’d rather deny you the sex she vowed to you when she vowed to be yours “to have and to hold”. Fradd is cheering the bitch on to burn her husband by denying him sex until he gives in to her control.
“Feminists believe that women should have 100% control of sexual activity, that they should be arbiters of who does and doesn’t get laid.”
Fradd is not on God’s side, telling the wife she is defrauding her husband and God by engaging in this sexual immorality of refusing her husband his due. You are not “taking” your wife’s sexuality! She was already given to you “to have”(sexually) by her father and by her own public vow. She is trying to take back control of what is no longer hers, to deny you what she vowed while expecting you to fulfill your side of the vow. She is defrauding you and God’s institution of marriage. Because castrati like Fradd defend this whore-worshipping rebellion, whereby women commit sexual immorality by abandoning their marriage vow to their husband, which is as unto Christ, and hold out their sexuality reserving it unto the will of Satan instead.
Ezekiel 16:32 You unfaithful wife! You desire strangers instead of your husband.
If your wife denies your reasonable request for honorable sexual activity, it is only because she has the unfaithful heart of a whore! Don’t sugar coat it. If she doesn’t put out, she is committing fraud, or Fradd, against her marriage, which she vowed to honor, and against you whom she vowed to obey. The person “taking” from your marriage is this despicable false-teacher who aims to take away what you as a man were rightfully vowed, by his satanic lie. If God reigned in our churches, no husband would ever be looked down on for taking his wife according to his own good pleasure to satisfy his bodily urges that she was created by God to satisfy. Don’t listen to that Biblically ignorant Feminist deceiver.
Like
Jeff Barnes says:
2020-09-21 at 6:01 pm
@Sharkly I agree with what your saying (I have taken the redpill). I don’t think I communicated the idea well(as you are NO ”genius” ladd), let me try again. Rightly ordered sexual desire generally tends to encourage us to give of ourselves. An example is a single person who is pursuing chastity and fleeing from sexual sin would have a greater ability to serve God and hence his neighbour. Also ideally in a marriage both partners are looking to sacrificially love one another, so that spiritual reality mirrors the physical. Have you read The Way of the Superior Man? This book has a wider view of sexuality in terms of the impact of our sexual energy. From you name and profile pic I thought you were a female but now from your comment I am guessing you are a man.
Like
Sharkly says:
2020-09-22 at 2:46 pm
No, I have not read ‘The Way of the Superior Man’. Us superior men read the Bible, and not so much these new books by other guys from this adulterous generation. I had a great father, and I spent my entire youth watching my father who feared God and none other. My father dedicated his life to working for God, he was a zealot for God. I don’t need a book to tell me how to be a superior man. It is what I am. While I am also still a sinner, I don’t see anybody alive in this generation who could give me a better example of how to be a man of God than I got from my own father, and that I get from God’s word, and God’s Spirit which is alive in me.
All charity/love is sacrificial. There is no genuine love that is not sacrificial. Sex and love are two different things, don’t try to confuse them together. Sex can be either a sacrifice, a win-win situation, or even an act of aggression, depending upon the situation and choices of both parties. To give yourself sexually to your mate can be an act of love, if you otherwise might not want to, however it is due to your spouse, and they have every right to take what is theirs, especially considering that sex is part of the purpose for marriage, and to refuse sex is to immorally defraud your mate sexually, and turn them over to satanic temptation.(1 Corinthians 7:2-5) Don’t let some Feminist goddess worshipper get you hung up on some hypothetical strawman sexual abuse. Just stay away from deviant sex acts and enjoy your mate as God intended you to do. Forget Matt Fradd. Just flip the taking/giving switch in your frame of mind. You’re not some beta-male taking sex from your wife, you’re an alpha-male giving that lucky lady a blast of your righteous seed. And you’d both be having a blast if you both had your hearts and minds in the right place. But you are primarily responsible for your own attitude and performance, there is only so much you can do if she is committed to sabotaging her own sexual experience.
Liked by 1 person
Jeff Barnes says:
2020-09-24 at 12:29 pm
Again I mainly agree with what your saying. This is my last comment because I think we are speaking past each other.
See where Barnes said ”Again I mainly agree with what your saying. This is my last comment because I think we are speaking past each other” instead of ” Again I mainly agree with what your saying. This is my last comment because I think you are just an average full of $#it liar and deceiver dude” because he was/is a polite (& knows Sparkly is a Bellevuian) fellow like myself, Derek, or MOD?
Well, I dont need a book, or blog, or podcast to tell me what a man is. I was born one. Red Pill takes these “strong” stances about being a man and they usually fall on to cultural norms. Things they supposedly despise. They then muscle them up with “scriptures” and other experts and then wonder why “it just isnt working” and “how come men dont like this / dont come”
The usual then response is smearing / shaming fellow men or blaming women and our “femcentric” society for the reasons why “its not working”
Mind you, they will tell you women cannot help themselves and will submit if a man displays these cultural characteristics of manhood. If she doesnt? “You are still doing it wrong / didnt trust God enough / still stuck on blue pilled thinking / didnt practice enough / re-read Rollo / you obviously like being miserable” statements and smears thrown on men they supoposedly “love” and “want to helP”
As if.
This “intellectual” class of Red Pilled Men are like the “party / communists / socialists / college professors” I had decades ago. Hammering on why “socialism or communism” didnt work was because it wasnt followed the way THEY taught it.
Is Red Pill at this point a psyop?????? It might well indeed be that. Useful idiots are needed on both sides as the culture goes down the drain.
Your post got flagged as spam. I pulled it out.