Once upon a time, the pickup artist who calls himself Heartiste (real name James Weidmann) actually provided his readers advice — terrible, backwards, and thoroughly misogynistic advice, but advice nonetheless — on how to pick up the hot babes.
These days he seems to devote most of his attention to laments over the “demographic displacement of White heritage America” and to increasingly elaborate fantasies of revenge towards the “shitlibs” and other alleged traitors who have supported or encouraged these alleged crimes against Whitey.
Now these fantasies have expanded to involve the sitting president, who Weidmann thinks should be literally hung for his “treason.”
In post on his blog yesterday, Weidmann reported with some alacrity that the
lame duck White House squatter Gay Mulatto [has] admitted to committing treason against the United States of America.
Oh, did I forget to mention that Weidmann has a strange habit of referring to Obama as “Gay Mulatto?” Well, he does. Because he thinks “mulatto” is a terrible insult and also because he’s convinced for some reason that Obama is gay.
So what exactly does Obama’s alleged “treason” consist of? Did he call upon a hostile foreign government to hack the email servers of his political enemies?
No, nothing so trivial. It seems that Obama acknowledged, in a recent interview on NPR, the incontrovertible demographic fact that America is getting less white.
“If you stopped all immigration today,” Obama told an NPR interviwer, “just by virtue of birth rates, this is going to be a browner country.”
To Weidmann, this is a SMOKING GUN.
A browner country is exactly what Gay Mulatto wanted. It’s why he refuses to close the border, why he won’t enforce immigration laws, why he wanted to fast-track unconditional amnesty and give illegals the vote, and why he has spent years and political capital bum rushing Somalis into heartland America.
Well, not so much. For what it’s worth, we’re hardly being flooded with foreigners. Illegal immigration hit a peak in 2007, and has been down ever since. In recent years, more Mexicans have left the US than have entered it. And while the actual numbers are murky, there’s no doubt that Obama has deported a substantial number of undocumented immigrants.
That said, Obama is right: people of color are having more babies than whites, and the country is getting “browner.” In thirty years or so, demographers expect, whites will no longer be the majority in the US.
As Weidmann sees it, this is all Obama’s fault:
Make no mistake, this was Gay Mulatto’s treasonous plan all along: the dispossession and demographic displacement of White heritage America. Open borders to the brown world was his biggest middle finger yet to the White lineage that he so despises in his own family tree.
Well, aside from the fact that the borders aren’t open.
HE IS OPENLY BRAGGING ABOUT THE INEVITABILITY OF IT NOW, because he thinks, not unjustifiably based on past experience, that White America won’t hold him accountable. That instead Whites will line up behind Gay Mulatto and cheer their till now bloodless annihilation from the nation their ancestors built and their White posterity will inherit.
But NO MORE! With Trump in power, Weidmann declares, evil “traitors” like Obama will get the retribution they deserve.
In clown world, he gets away with it. Luckily for him, he’s leaving right at the moment clown world is about to cede to a resurgent sane world, in which the gallows for traitors to the nation are returned to service. We have these treasonous vermin on record and every legal justification at hand. All we need now is the will to make our enemies pay for their crimes against the People of the United States.
Cue the Mitchell/Web “Are We the Baddies?” sketch.
So Mister Heartiste of Château Heartiste, do you even live in the USA?
And isn’t being a pickup “artist” (snort) a degenerate pastime, let alone “occupation”?
Also, do you even have white children? Children whom you are raising? Along with your white wife?
Who’s the treasonous cuck now, Monsieur Heartiste?
@Alan
Originally you had to show up in tonsure and vestments and read a bible verse, but the rules were later relaxed. 1351 was when literacy was officially made the only requirement .
Women were also burned for petty treason; men were quartered and hanged. Until the 1700s I think, when it became hanging regardless.
@ dalillama
For some reason I find that image really funny. Like “Look at me guv, of course I’m a priest, honest”. I bet there was a roaring trade in quick haircuts and costume hire.
Intellectually, I know that…but here’s me going “So you thought to yourself, well, if JOAN RIVERS said it, it MUST be true!! Seriously??”
Speaking of hanging, I remember being on a tour in Sweden and hearing from the guide that while male criminals were hanged, female criminals were buried alive instead because the men would keep looking up the hanging women’s dresses. When I heard that I was just like, wow…
That man is battier than bat-shaped, bat-sized, bat-coloured, bat-scented, bat-flavoured batshit.
Hey! No slandering of bats! This guy is definitely in favor of white noses. (I am so, so sorry.)
Michelle Obama is apparently tied with Eleanor Roosevelt for Tallest First Lady. I say Eleanor still wins…five eleven is taller for a woman born in 1884 than for one born in 1964.
@Alan
Remember Princess Di’s lover James Hewitt, who then wrote a book about their fling?
After that book was published, I saw a report on the news about how technically Hewitt was a traitor.
The Brit reporter, who was just outside Windsor Castle, pointed out the sign that marked the gate through which, in times gone by, traitors would pass on their way to be hung: Traders Gate.
@Jurgan
Please don’t make satire that comes of as casually transphobic like that.
@BritterSweet:
Aaaand now MY mouth is hanging, too…off its hinges, that is. So, if I’m reading this correctly, they tortured women to death by smothering because they wanted to keep men from the sinful pastime of staring up their skirts? (Not that hanging is really that much more humane, either, but the logic of that is just…WOW.)
@Bina
Once again purity fanaticisms proves itself to be the most toxic of all.
Welp, time to hit the gym, draw up meal plans, and start getting a regular 7.5-8 hours of sleep, because goddammit I want to be alive when that happens. I want to see if we white Americans can finally collectively learn our lesson, as a culmination and reversal of over four hundred years of fucking up, before becoming a political minority renders any ultimate moral realignment completely moot.
Also, to potentially fight the assholes who react to the news by trying to literally recreate Apartheid, but eh. I live with a hopeful heart. Most days.
@Brittersweet & Bina
Wake up, make some coffee, sit down… and see this.
My brain is just one giant, desperate WHY now.
I mean it doesn’t even make sense to my practical asshole side, let alone my human side.
@ Bina
I was more disgusted that the men would ogle the women even when they were dying or dead.
Inappropriate would be a gross understatement.
Kat:
Well, word is that Hewitt was hung.
So… he’s a Nazi. Muh pure blood, muh Muslim hordes, muh one-drop rule. I bet he’s going to argue that he’s not a Nazi because he didn’t end that screed with “Sieg Heil”.
@BritterSweet: love that you linked that cartoon with the Native Americans. Perfect for this thread.
Swedish woman here, and I heard about the hanging for men, live burial for women executions in olden times too when I was a kid. It made me go “fuuuuck”. I mean, if you have to go, I’d pick hanging a million times over that.
Moggie,
Word is, so’s his son.
You’ve read the book, I presume? Harry Windsor and the Half-Blood Prince
There’s a line in Persuasion, where Anne and Lady Russell spot Captain Wentworth in the street, but Lady Russell pretends not to have seen him:
“You will wonder,” said she, “what has been fixing my eye so long; but I was looking after some window-curtains, which Lady Alicia and Mrs. Frankland were telling me of last night. They described the drawing-room window-curtains of one of the houses on this side of the way, and this part of the street, as being the handsomest and best hung of any in Bath, but could not recollect the exact number, and I have been trying to find out which it could be; but I confess I can see no curtains hereabouts that answer their description.”
I heard someone on a podcast once argue that Austen is making a slightly risque joke here.
There’s the one about the pervert who exposed himself to two elderly ladies.
“Did you see that, Ethel?” said one of them, “He should be bloody well hung”
“You need an eye test” said Ethel, “He bloody well was”!
Alan Robertshaw;
Not forgetting Will Carling and Hewitt’s ‘daddy’ Major Hewitt.
Wasn’t Charles I executed for treason or am I mis-remembering my history lessons (back in historical times)?
Viscaria says:
So if you want to get the ultimate revenge on obnoxiously loud neighbors, all you have to do is buy an easily riled dog and name it “Her Majesty”?
@ nobody special
Indeed he was; or at least that was the stated reason. However his trial was controversial even at the time. The courts ruled that Charles, as sovereign, couldn’t be tried for treason and refused to take jusrisidiction.
Parliament therefore passed an Act stating that Parliament could sit as a tribunal with the power to convict of treason. A lot of people (including many on the parliamentarian side) weren’t very happy with that for all sorts of reasons. Not least because at the time it was still accepted that all acts of Parliament required Royal Assent. Understandably Charles wasn’t willing to give his assent to that particular Act.
So there was a hearing of sorts. Charles refused to take part. Parliament then passed a vote saying he was guilty of treason and could be executed. There was again some debate as to whether there was a proper quorum for that (many members of parliament had refused to take part). But the practical upshot was that Charles was executed.
It’s still debated amongst constututional scholars as to whether he was properly convicted or whether parliament acted ultra vires and was thus guilty of regicide.
The execution of Charles I was a bloody coup deposing a dictator with a background of civil war.
Arguing about whether it was legal under civilian law is as consequential as determining the number of angels on a pin.
@ numerobis
Yeah, but that’s what passes for fun in the legal fraternity. (We once had an Anglo-US lawyers thing where the motion was whether George Washington was a traitor)
But there are practical consequences as well. The Charles ‘trial’ has all sorts of implications about the sovereignty of parliament and separation of powers. So for example, after WW2, there was a proposal to just use an Act of Attainder (which is effectively what happened with Charles) against the Nazi war criminals. In the end though we went down the Nuremberg route. That was as much for political reasons as legal. But there was much legal debate.
Even today it crops up with our drone policy. The question being, can Parliament use the Royal Prerogative or legislation to bypass the need for a trial before executing a drone strike?
So it’s still all petty relevant.