thats the same logic as "i wont vote because my vote isnt going to matter anyways" and then nobody votes

@Jacob I agree with that, I was looking at it more as them wasting their time by even taking this vote instead of doing something, literally just a virtue signal vote

If you were to take "white supremacy" to a lot of people in the dissident right they would disavow. I don't understand why he said that. King should ask Patrick for advice.

i just skimmed through the resolution, its pretty preachy

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/41/text?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22congressId%3A116+AND+billStatus%3A%5C%22Introduced%5C%22%22%5D%7D&r=21&s=1

>this climate
>climate is more WN than anything since the seventies

Congressmen have two year shelf life, fresh senators have six. At the rate things are going a fresh senator with balls could display solidarity and spin it well by reelection

what's the take on William Barr for AG?

"Whereas while our country has often fallen short of these ideals, patriotic Americans have sought to form a more perfect Union by rejecting White nationalism and White supremacy, embracing inclusive patriotism, and welcoming immigrants from across the globe who have continuously enriched our Nation;"
i agree that white supremacy is bad optics but come on this is just infuriating

i mean i also dont believe in white supremacy but nationalism is patriotism

https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1085078753418473472

again and again

the GOP never learns

if I was a congressman I would probably just abstain

say that it's a meaningless virtue signal vote

but I don't think I would have the balls to vote "no" on condemning white nationalism

it would risk taking me out of power

with the benefit of *slightly* moving the Overton Window

If I was a congressman, I think my main focus would be to just lay low, don't say anything too controversial, and try to get away with passing as much good legislation as possible

I'd introduce immigration bills and make up bullshit post hoc rationalizations for why I support it.
"oh I think we need to cut immigration to reduce overpopulation"

let someone who doesn't have a position to lose do the proselytizing

Far leftists are actually pretty smart and don't fall for huwyte taqqiyya

Note how the wording of the resolution reduces politics to a binary choice between "welcoming immigrants from across the globe" and "white supremacy"

ya but most people aren't far leftists so who cares

My average conservative constituent would be like "oh cool he's stopping us from getting overpopulated"

Just remember 2/3 of Congress attend AIPAC

Yeah, yeah I am sure you would have done so much better

well, my point kind of is opposite

my point is that I probably *wouldn't* have done much better than the guys virtue signalling

🐖🐖🐖🐖🐽🐽🐽

I wouldn't go up there and be a hero

Our people need heroes

Too many Congress people just want to lay low and stay in office, I'd rather just have one term and actually get something done

No, we don't need people martyring themselves when there's other ways to make themselves useful

This is how we end up with career congressmen

The boomer anti-racism chicanery/taqiyya isn't aimed at leftists but Nationalists who need permission or cover.

@StevePines -WA That's a valid point. They can't take the lay low stuff *too* far, they have to do *something*.

Waiting for useful congressmen to do useful things....
Any day now

Steve King is more useful in Congress than as a nobody. He needs to be more careful about who he talks to and to not make tactless statements to the media

@TMatthews Ya, exactly. That's why I'm saying we really don't need people martyring themselves when they could be doing something useful. There's no shame in keeping your mouth shut when you have to.

I agree with @Jacob, for now.

The rhetoric from the right should be "democrats are anti-white, anti-family, anti-men, etc" which you can say while claiming to only want equal opportunity. Tucker Carlson does this quite well.