PS: I enjoyed your comments, Fred the Gator. Thank you very much.

From Mr. Hail: "Peter Brimelow says he cannot fathom why the impeachment mechanism isn't used more often, for it is an out-in-the-open check on executive power that doesn't require insider games and "court politics.""

Yes, and that goes for judges and plenty of State elected officials - they can be recalled, if not impeached. "They are in office for life", one hears, but that's only if you play softball and don't know the rules of hardball.

PS

-- On why Robert Hur "did it" --

rE: Moderator's most-recent comment: My view on Robert Hur is that he tried to do a power-play here, with his outrageous and highly-unusual wording in a legal report, thinking that it will benefit himself to be seen on the side of a (potentially) winning faction.

In other words, Robert Hurt saw/sees the head-man as wounded and thinks he will benefit from participating in a take-down. There is no other explanation for why he included such wording. It is even dishonorable, by our standards, what he did.

In still other words, and maybe to get to the real pont: it is classic-Korean "court politics."

That is not really the (White-)American tradition, at least not done in that way. Impeachment of an official for gross negligence is more the White-American tradition, such as just happened today with our benighted Hebrew "Secretary of Homeland Security" Mayorkas. Peter Brimelow says he cannot fathom why the impeachment mechanism isn't used more often, for it is an out-in-the-open check on executive power that doesn't require insider games and "court politics."

a comment such as the one I've left here would be sure to throw Twinkie into battle on behalf of his team. I think he'd likely "side" with Hur over any critic of Hur's from any angle, for the reasons you outline.

PS: Mr. Hail, this is tangent even to your comment, but I still have that hankering to interact with the Unz folks sometimes. Regarding the Koreans in America, as you know the commenter Twinkie, a bright and upstanding citizen, from what we gather, has this thing about defending all things Korean, In Korea, and especially in America. Yet he is highly assimilated by his own admission and writing, so why should he care?

Anyway, this post from VDare, ( https://vdare.com/posts/robert-hur-korean-american-the-immigration-angle-on-the-failure-to-prosecute-joe-biden ) about one Robert Hur - Ben's brother? - well, you can see the title in the URL.

Writer Federale wavers between thinking this guy didn't go through with any (special) prosecution of Biden due to an accessory to Bai Dien's holding of classified material, one Kathy Chung, being a fellow Korean, or just that he's another Deep State guy. Well, I'd like to ask Twinkie to try to defend Mr. Hur as some patriotic Korean-America. Being the arbiter of all things Korean means that at least Twinkie ought to write a strongly worded letter. ;-}

PS

-- On what Christianity means to Chinese and others --

I'm glad you were able to comment here, Pastor Fred (or Pastor Gator, if you prefer), as this seems an area of your special expertise and experience.

I have some experience with Taiwanese Christians in the USA. The rate of at-least-nominal Christianity among general-population Taiwanese in the USA seems much higher than back home (in Taiwan). The newly elected President of Taiwan, Lai, is apparently NOT a Christian, though lots of the leading political figures in Taiwan are (have been), including, e.g., the recent vice president under President Tsai. I think the rate is high among "cabinet secretary"-equivalents and legislature members, right alongside right rates of PhD degrees and such.

The reasons for this are probably roughly the same as why, back in the late 1920s, this character Chiang Kai-shek began studying the Bible and converted (under the Methodist church). Probably under his wife's influence, as far as I know (who was U.S.-educated and acquired the skill of charm with Western audiences). But Chiang Kai-shek -- who was a poor politician and administrator and, according to General Stillwell's memoirs, was more of a buffoon than anything -- already styled himself the man to lead "the Republic of China" into an international-standing of dignity in the international-community that China hadn't had since maybe the 18th century, if even then. (And it still doesn't, even now; the PRC-China regime is loved by few, except that one oddball "frenemy" of Peak Stupidity known as Godfrey Roberts).

The story by which "Madame Chiang" and other Chinese Christians of older times became Christians most-often seems to tie directly to the United States, and thus to the active U.S. Protestant missions of that optimistic age. The Jesuits had a centuries-long presence but in many eras and areas antagonized and enflamed situations, contributing directly to some of the rebellions, uprisings, civil wars that litter China's history. But the pro-American tendencies of old Chinese (I refer to those of some generations past, all dead now) allowed for some U.S.-Protestant successes, despite (or because of) U.S. absence from direct "holdings" in the sphere-of-influence politics days. The U.S. diplomatic policy in China was called "the Open Door Policy" (the overly bold interpretation of which in the 1930s, many say led to the U.S.-Japan "Pacific War", which was engaged in a vast nation-building project of its own in China, and by then could not extricate itself from the China problem).

Many Chinese probably don't think much about the hugely-important U.S. role in shaping what China became in the 19th and 20th centuries. They are too focused within their own world. So Christianity can easily become a "domestic political" football.

I'd also make this bold statement: Christianity, for lots of people in peripheral contact with it, including most ordinary Taiwanese, is often not what it is to us: We tend to think of being a Christian as being part of a Christian-only community and believing a set of Christian-beliefs and the primary of Jesus Christ; someone like a Taiwanese is often likely to rather want to incorporate the "Jesus story" into a fusion religion with other elements of his past, be it "Confucianism," Taoism, Buddhism, or vague "folk religion."

That tendency to "instrumentalize" Christianity that I refer to, if true, would put many of the Chinese-sphere Christians on a par with our "Unitarian-Universalists," though probably more serious than them. Or, it would put the Chinese-sphere Christians into a world where rather than China being Christianized, Chinese Culture can swallow up the Christian layer. Many committed Christians among them would not like this, but a modus vivendi is reached, bowing to the considerable strength and staying-power of "Chinese cultural chauvinism" (that China is without question the world's best civilization, except for the scoundrelish meddling by Western people).

I wonder if (how many) Chinese-sphere (incl. Taiwanese in this case) Christian pastors preach sermons criticizing the tendencies I refer to among their own flocks? There is probably a real tendency to worry that a Chinese/Taiwanese population as such could dissolve in a society like the USA's, which I've noticed changes many of their thinking in ways that undermine basic cultural-continuity instincts. Many of them dive into wishing to be aspirant members of the multicultural Woke-Elie coalition. (See the case of Michelle Wu, left-wing mayor of Boston, of Taiwanese origin.)

PS Hail says, "But I wonder, in the "Chinese-Christian" sense if they aren't more just floating around in their own mental world (hence the Taiwan-vs-PRC rivalry even within a Christian mission thousands of miles away), rather than neglecting to mention Whites out of either ingratitude or tacit anti-White bias."

I think this is true. Chinese can be quite insular when there are enough of them to be insular. And virtually every campus where there are a reasonable number of Chinese has an "Asian-American Christian Fellowship" of some sort.

I think it's a reflection of the older generation having churches that are Chinese or Chinese/English bilingual, with all the attendees being Chinese. So the younger generation is used to that.

I also felt kind of strange at the fact that Chinese or Asians of one stripe or another will take pot-shots at American culture. I said to one of my Asian-American friends that Asian-Americans are probably the most fortunate subgroup in the world. They get all the benefits of American culture plus they don't get blamed for those benefits plus they are usually from intact families, which is a major economic advantage. And so on.

PS I think I may part ways with some of the views here (though I'm certainly glad to peruse and interact with them). I'm a hard-core supernaturalist and I think "the church" is a supernatural entity. Unfortunately it gets swallowed up by the institutional superstructure, much of which is of human invention. (Not to say that some kind of form isn't necessary for any human interaction. As Martin Buber put it, every "I-Thou" must become an "I-It" to have expression. But "it is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is of no avail.")

Where I have a problem with my fellow Christians is when they impose the cost of their "righteousness" on society. For example, in the move GRAND TOURINO it comes out that the Lutherans imported the Hmong into the area where the story was set. And then, as one character said, "the girls went to college and the guys went to jail." This is similar to importing Somalis into Minnesota. (I wonder whose bright idea that was. It's like sending Eskimos to the Sahara desert.) All the "sanctuary city" stuff and other do-goodisms that people in churches have gone for just means that they get to feel good while the people who have to deal with the consequences are screwed. While Jesus didn't actually say, "Don't impose the cost of your righteous deeds on others," it's hard for me to think he would not have felt that way. But then again I don't want to put my words in his mouth; rather the opposite....

While I believe "our citizenship is in heaven", I also believe that while I'm in this world I should do good to those around me. But in my view that doesn't mean activism. It means live my life in such a way to be a positive influence on those around me, on my neighborhood to the best of my ability, my profession, and indirectly to society as a whole. I believe that doing the best possible job bringing up my family is more valuable than being an activist in some cause du jour, where I cannot even be sure I'm doing good rather than harm.

Someone said that there is not a single word in the gospels in support of political action. Jesus, when asked to resolve a dispute over inheritance, said, "Who made me a judge over you?" I take this generally: if society at large isn't following Jesus, why should they be expected to ... uh ... follow Jesus? There's a theological problem with expecting people who do not have God's Spirit helping them to live as if they had God's Spirit helping them.

PS Personal pet peeve: It’s either “Chicagoland” (if memory serves, a locution promoted by the late Col Robert McCormick, publisher of the Chicago Tribune) or “Chicago area”. Far too many pea-brains in the media make it “Chicagoland area”.

PS: "But they also had lots of influence on homegrown wackos or movements tangential to Christianity, like the guy who founded an apocalypse cult that triggered China's biggest civil war of the 19th century." Yep, I had no idea until reading an posting about the Taiping "Rebellion" that it was that big a deal. My post is here:

https://www.peakstupidity.com/index.php?post=1155

"A Great War never even heard of - the Taiping Rebellion"

Thanks for the interesting comment - I've got more to say re Koreans, but I've got to go. I'll check out your link later on, Adam.

PS: Good afternoon, everyone!

https://i.ibb.co/bQjYQ01/High-Trust-Society.jpg

☮️

PS

"this Chinese preacher never acknowledged that he and his Chinese audience were in America due to the tolerance of the actual American people. Even worse was that there was no mention, no thanks, for the American White people who developed a country in which Christians could thrive without repression from Government. There was ZERO gratitude exuded by this man."

The history of East Asia over the past two centuries was quite a wild and unpredictable thing, sometimes almost seeming like a computer-game being played by a reckless player out for a good time. Wild or dramatic things happening often; casts of characters that seem tailor-made for drama.

One of the lines was the influence of Western Christianity, which at times looked to have high potential indeed to break through. Alas the great gains didn't occur except in a few places (South Korea seen as the biggest "success story") and among a few social milieux (lots of R.O.C./Taiwan's high social-strata being Christians).

But they also had lots of influence on homegrown wackos or movements tangential to Christianity, like the guy who founded an apocalypse cult that triggered China's biggest civil war of the 19th century.

The point is, it seems like what a lot of "Chinese" are thinking about Christianity is probably not through an objective lens but, as usual with them, something that has become insularized to a degree.

An anti-White/anti-Western bias is always possible with East Asians, and forms an important part of their psyche, certainly so for PRC-China. But I wonder, in the "Chinese-Christian" sense if they aren't more just floating around in their own mental world (hence the Taiwan-vs-PRC rivalry even within a Christian mission thousands of miles away), rather than neglecting to mention Whites out of either ingratitude or tacit anti-White bias.

PS: Oh, and no, this guy is neither loving his neighbors nor his country.

PS: He's too deep in the books, his and The Book, I guess, Alarmist. He wants big numbers too. I often have a hard time with the idea of evangelizing.

PS

The dude conflates religion with God. He is an idiot.

Honor God,
Love your family,
Defend your country.