J.D. Vance Mocks Childless Cat Women

I don’t especially trust J.D. Vance, he is a politician after all who rose to fame and prominence by (in my opinion) airing his family’s dirty laundry for the amusement of the elite East Coast class. Even still my opinion of him is that (caveat that all politics is fake and gay) he is the best of the potential running mates Trump could have selected and the one that gives the Left hives thinking about him replacing Trump. The rest, from Rubio to Tim Scott to Bugrum or whatever the hell his name is, are just empty suits.

When you become a nominee for public office, especially the running mate of LITERAL HITLER Orange Man, your background is going to be dug through. When it is 2024 and you have social media and video clips? People will find you saying something and try to turn it into political fodder. Vance is being portrayed as mocking the childless and of course that lumps in people unable to have children while his point was a more serious one.

The controversy surrounding Vance’s remarks reignited as the footage from his 2021 interview with Tucker Carlson on Fox News resurfaced. In that interview, Vance criticized childless women in positions of power, suggesting they are less invested in the country’s future. He stated, “We are effectively run, in this country, by a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable in their own lives and want to make the rest of the country miserable too.”

Vance’s remarks specifically targeted Democratic figures like Kamala Harris, whom he argued was emblematic of a broader trend of leaders without children shaping national policies. “You look at Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, AOC; the entire future of the Democrats is controlled by people without children,” Vance said. “How does it make any sense that we have turned our country over to people that don’t have any stake in it?”

^{https://archive.vn/KQuM0}

That is a completely valid point and it gets to why I have such antipathy toward the MGTOW movement and online “right-wing” voices that are invariably anonymous urging men to not get married and not have children. Without children, why bother fighting? I suspect quite strongly that many of these anonymous accounts telling young men to not have families are run by leftists.

Our future is not found in laws or economics or possessions. Our future is to be found only in our people and without children there will be no people and therefore there is no future.

His point is valid. The Lügenpresse, running cover for Cumala, likes to point out that other U.S. Presidents didn’t have children including George Washington. The difference is that Washington was 27 when he married Martha, who had four children from her first husband before becoming a widow at 26 and then marrying George Washington. According to places like The Washington Post (Democracy Dies in Darkness!), Washington claimed not having children was a good thing: George Washington said his lack of ‘immediate offspring’ was good for U.S.

But what did Washington mean? This is in the same article from WaPo….

In an undelivered draft of his first inaugural address, George Washington wrote that his lack of biological children would benefit the country.

“Divine Providence hath not seen fit, that my blood should be transmitted or my name perpetuated by the endearing, though sometimes seducing channel of immediate offspring,” the first U.S. president had considered including in the April 30, 1789, speech. “I have no child for whom I could wish to make a provision — no family to build in greatness upon my Country’s ruins.”

In other words: There would be no American royal dynasty, as The Washington Post reported more than 225 years later.

Washington wanted children and regretted being unable to have any, as the article later states, but in his case he ascribed the lack of children to “Divine Providence” and thought it a good thing as he deeply wanted to avoid an American hereditary monarchy. He didn’t eschew fatherhood because of climate change or residual guilt over White supremacy but rather was apparently infertile (as Martha had four children).

What about Cacklin’ Cumala?

After whoring around for decades, often with married men, Cumala married a Jewish entertainment lawyer a few months shy of her 50th birthday. She was too old at that point to have children, even if her “husband” was even willing to impregnate her. This article is pretty interesting: Strange circumstances surround Kamala’s husband the day Joe Biden dropped out of the race…

Why was it strange? Well this is why….

Joe Biden dropping out of the presidential race was a very big deal. It’s an even bigger deal if you’re his VP or the husband of his VP, right? Well, you’d think so, but for Doug Emhoff, it was a pretty uneventful moment. As a matter of fact, he had no idea it happened, and as a result, rumors and speculation are swirling around Kamala’s elusive hubby and what he is really up to.

The internet is convinced that Mr. Emhoff is more of a “fixture” for Kamala than a real husband. Rumors that he’s gay are everywhere, and his complete “space out” during the biggest announcement of his wife’s career hasn’t helped matters. Doug told a group of LGBTQ folks, known as “Black and Gay Queer Men for Harris,” that he was “caught by surprise” when the news broke. At the time of Joe’s rather bizarre announcement on Twitter, Doug was working out and hanging with his gay friends in West Hollywood, unaware until people started approaching him to relay the big news.

Well that is interesting. Kamala wants to be President but she needs a spouse so she conveniently marries a guy when she is almost 50, a guy that is strongly rumored to be a faggot. Her “husband” is hanging around with a couple of faggots when Biden announced he was dropping out and didn’t have access to a phone. Really?

It’s interesting that nobody on his team or security detail had access to a phone. It also sounds like Kamala not only had no idea where her husband was but was pretty peeved that he was unreachable.

I always have my phone with me because it is how I do business but the husband of the Vice President of the United States, a man with a Secret Service security detail, was having tea or something with a couple of fags and didn’t even have his phone with him? What say you Paulie?

It seems more likely that he was engaged in some Paul Pelosi style shenanigans with one or more homos and was…too busy…to check his phone. I am not well versed in faggot etiquette but it probably is considered to be rude to be texting while getting pounded in the ass.

I hadn’t given much thought to the family dynamics of Cumala as she is so incredibly unlikable and loathsome that it makes me nauseous to think about her. It would make sense and be in keeping with a fine tradition of Democrats for her to latch onto a fag that wouldn’t want anything from her but would give her a faux “husband”. She can keep riding the cock carousel and so could he and neither one bothers the other. Killary Klinton and Bill obviously hate one another and I doubt they have voluntarily spent a night in the same room for decades, they are rarely even in the same state. Hillary wanted power and needed a man with coattails to ride and Bill needed a “wife” to keep up appearances while banging every chubby cocktail waitress he could get his sweaty hands on. The Obama’s? Again, GTFOH. Barack is so flaming he should have warning stickers and “Michelle” is either a man or just an incredibly homely woman. It is officially on the record that “their” two “girls” were conceived via artificial insemination, a common practice with cattle. Has Barack ever dipped his wick into that monstrosity? I doubt it. As is the case with the Clinton’s, he needed a “wife” to get to higher office and Michelle? I have no idea what she/it wanted out of the deal, maybe to be famous and wealthy without having to work for it.

None of that is the point of this post. Middle aged, empty egg carton childless cat ladies are the worst. I expect awful behavior from black women, it is in their nature. But these White women with their “careers” and “independent spirits” and empty wine bottles in apartments with cats and “Live, Laugh, Love” signs? They ought to be wives and mothers instead of being alone and childless and Vance is absolutely correct that they are “…miserable in their own lives and want to make the rest of the country miserable too”. Many of the social ills in America can be directly tied back to feminism making women unhappy and those women, who were foolishly given the vote, do all they can to make everyone else as unhappy as they are. But I saw something interesting pop up on Facebook…

An Ann Coulter sighting! She has become sort of the female version of Richard Spencer, a crazy crank that comes out of the woodwork now and again to remind everyone she is crazy. She describes natalists as “nuts” but what is a natalist? Wikipedia sez:

Natalism (also called pronatalism or the pro-birth position) is a policy paradigm or personal value that promotes the reproduction of human life as an important objective of humanity and therefore advocates high birthrate.

^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natalism}

Reproduction is an important objective of humanity? No shit Sherlock! Whether looking at human beings as the highest form of animals or as creatures created “in the image of God”, throughout history the basic hierarchy of needs is pretty obvious with things like air, water, food, shelter and of course reproduction as the foundations. If you don’t have enough to eat, you aren’t that concerned with self-esteem and finding yourself. If your species (or race) doesn’t reproduce, it dies out. There is a reason that for most of us the sex drive, especially when we are younger, is so powerful.

It is also no secret that Whites both in America and wherever we are to be found in any number across Europe and Australia/New Zealand, are well below replacement levels of fertility. The non-Whites/Asians are still having tons of children and are going to demographically swamp us through sheer numbers and with the aid of (((non-governmental organizations))). Anyone concerned about “conserving” Western civilization has got to be concerned about both immigration and White birth rates. It isn’t either-or, it is both-and. Not to Ann, from her essay linked above:

There’s a disturbing trend among post-Trump populists to think that just because they’ve rejected the old GOP ideas about tax cuts and permanent war, they should also reject standard GOP ideas about big government and social engineering.

Currently, the most embarrassing of the allegedly populist right-wing enthusiasms is the pro-natalist argument. The idea, in a nutshell, is that family formation is good for society, so why not create government programs that encourage family formation?

Ann still believes in the school of thought that our problems can be solved by “eliminating 90%” of government. Sure sweetheart, tell me how that would ever happen. Try to cut government by even 1% and see who signs on in Congress other than Thomas Massie. She continues:

One is left with the strong impression that these marriage and child boosters are people who are sorry they got married and had kids, so they have to turn their life’s greatest regret into the equivalent of landing at Normandy.

Human reproduction doesn’t require a P.R. team. All the Beatles got married and had kids. Mick Jagger got married and had kids. If ever there were men who had no reason to get married and have kids, it was those guys. But people want to get married and have kids.

Sure, the Beatles and Mick Jagger are great examples of incredibly wealthy rock stars who got married, they are just like a young White guy that is a diesel mechanic. Does anyone get the impression that people like Mitt Romney and J.D. Vance are sorry they got married and had kids? Seriously? There is someone in this conversation that seems to regret choices but it isn’t J.D. Vance.

Ann Coulter is in her 60s meaning that her shot at reproducing ran out decades ago. She has been dating all sorts of unsavory characters including a Jewish Leftist from the New York City council named Andrew Stein, dollar store Haji Dinesh D’Souza and at least one black guy that I recall. Never married, no children, in her 60s and facing a life alone. Her acerbic personality was considered OK when she was younger and moderately attractive but now she is charging toward Social Security age. She also played the jilted lover when she first fell in love with Trump and then nastily turned on him later.

Do you think perhaps she is the one dealing with regret?

She is famous and wealthy but when she dies she will be remembered briefly for being an especially unpleasant woman and then forgotten completely. It will be as if she never existed. Her brand of “conservatism” is one that has no eye for the future because her bloodline has no future. The ideas raised by Vance and others are problematic in some ways, especially apart from a racial consciousness, but they aren’t bad ideas inherently because a childless bitter old lady regrets not having children.

The bigger point of the post is that it matters who we recognize as leaders on /ourside/. I am not saying that those without children cannot be leaders but the character of a person matters. Ann Coulter has always played the conservative shrew. Someone like Richard Spencer clearly had a jacked up personal life and a terrible personality. I wouldn’t trust him to water my flowers while I was on vacation much less lead a movement. Greg Johnson as Counter-Currents is an open homosexual and while he has some interesting things to say, a homosexual isn’t someone I am willing to trust so his utility is very limited. The same with Nick Fuentes who is a still in the closet homosexual and a loser. If he wasn’t being edgy online he would be a shift supervisor at Burger King. There are plenty of moderately bright people on /ourside/ that can’t get over being egomaniacs (looking at you V.D.).

We have plenty of barriers on our side, stemming from being outside of polite conversation, so it matters who we recognize as leaders and important voices. Spencer was a cartoonish villain, a bored rich kid that latched onto the alt-right for a lack of anything better to do and became semi-famous for a time as a Snidely Whiplash character for the media and normies to boo and hiss at. Ann Coulter was amusing for being nasty which makes for good TV but as a person she isn’t anyone you would want your daughters to emulate.

Most of all our movement, whatever it is, must have an eye toward the future. It is easy to lash out at one another for not being red-pilled enough on the JQ or whatever else but if there isn’t a future that we can imagine, what the fuck are we doing except wasting time online? That isn’t “VOTE MOAR HARDERER” Pollyanna thinking but being realistic and optimistic about what happens down the road. It will be a tough road but having a future for our people, our blood living on our soil, makes that road worthwhile. Without that there is no reason to fight.