Comments:Wikinews interviews John Taylor Bowles, National Socialist Order of America candidate for US President
This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.
Quick hints for new commentators:
- Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
- Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
- You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading
- 1 Funny
- 2 Oh the Nazis
- 3 We should kick HIM out of the country.
- 4 A sad sense of entitlement
- 5 Comment
- 6 This is the featured article? Shame.
- 7 NO WONDER HE HAS NO CHANCE IN WINNING THIS ELECTION..
- 8 Mysterious accident?
- 9 Stop making fun of him.
- 10 Oh come on, it's jolly good fun to make fun of him
- 11 Thank you Wikinews!
- 12 Wikinews interviews John Taylor Bowles, National Socialist Order of America candidate for US President
- 13 This country WAS built by Whites FOR Whites
- 14 Racism at it's finest
- 15 hes already got my vote but.....
- 16 Great policies
Just plain funny. He probaly couldnt even vote for himself.
Oh the Nazis
Always such good fun and always give us all a chuckle. Though it is pretty creepy how he sounds very un-racist, this whole trying to go more mainstream by dropping the use of "niggers and kikes" rhetoric. Very un-nerving. (I aplogize if this offended anyone, but I'm being serious here) --TUFKAAP - (talk) 18:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- I agree. Given the rabid anti-immigrant sentiment in many parts of the country, I'm sure this guy's policies would get a lot of support if the pro-white rhetoric and the fact he was Nazi was omitted. Spacehusky - (talk) 16:18, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- He'd heve to wear a suit also, looking at his campagin site, his front page shows him lounging around in his brownshirt including armband, so yeah... he's only going to garner votes from the neo-Nazis. But still un-nerving, but at least the Nazis are still castigated in a country like this, The UK has a worse problem with the BNP. --TUFKAAP - (talk) 01:21, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
We should kick HIM out of the country.
The United States was not made as a country for white people. That is not what the Founding Fathers wanted. They wanted an inclusive place, where they people from everywhere could live without discrimination, as it says "All men are equal under God". There is a reason this guy won't be getting any place in the white house. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 19:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- "I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races. I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. ... And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race." - Abraham Lincoln 18.104.22.168 14:31, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- Nice, but Lincoln was not a founding father. 22.214.171.124 06:51, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
- Much as I'd like to, we can't. We all know these people are psychotic, and we can't kick them out. Too bad. I'm in school. His site? Blocked under "Hate/Discrimination, Politics (WTF?!)
Nonsense. The US is about freedom, and freedom to express your twisted perspective on things is his right, as it is his right to run for president. It doesn't matter what Abe Lincoln thought or what Mr. Bowles thinks. They can express whatever views they like, and that is what makes this country beautiful. I say let him stay and give him a nice big plasma TV so he can see the possible election of a minority man into the the head of his supposedly white nation, and see it in high definition.--RobKohr - (talk) 18:08, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, the guy has a right to his freedom. If you'd kick him out for what he says, then you are the same as him -- a communist-fascist. If he's somehow elected and starts putting his words to action, then there'd be something to say for exiling him... as we should perhaps think about doing with the majority of our current government... Reeldyne - (talk) 15:59, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
- He is a facist, but I don't think it is accurate to call a nazi "communist". 126.96.36.199 06:48, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
A sad sense of entitlement
The so called white bloc scares the living daylights out of me. It's truly unfortunate that this nation was built atop the blood and corpses of the largest massacre in history. Hitler was surely proud of how this machine came to existence. America as a whole has become one of the most corrupt and bile societies on this planet. People are being crushed daily under the regime of the handful that own the government while there are places that set prime examples as to how well off things could be. Just off the top of my head, well just about any country that strives to educate it's people and provide the basic means of survival. --- From the mind of a HIV positive, uninsured American, that is overworked and underpaid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 20:44, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, please, it was not the largest massacre in history. -184.108.40.206 21:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- Does it? There is no such thing, fortunately. The "white bloc" is a desire of some of the many who want to take control of the country and eliminate what freedom we have left. Same thing with "women should vote for Hillary" and "if you're black, vote for Obama", but I don't see quite so much criticism there, eh? By the way, your HIV is your problem to deal with, not ours. If you're suggesting the government should steal from all of us to treat you, you are one and the same with the "regime of the handful that own the government" that crushes people daily. That said, I personally sympathize and wish you the best -- but charity is the place to ask, not government. Reeldyne - (talk) 15:56, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Shame wikipedia for legitmimizing this scum bag by giving him an intervieww when he should be laughed at and mocked for being ignorant useless scum. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- This isn't Wikipedia; it's Wikinews. Interviewing someone does not "legitimize" them. I agree that this guy has some very unpleasant views. But please, don't call for censorship on Wikinews -- one of the special things about this website is that it can report things that other news agencies wouldn't touch. It's very interesting to read how this man expresses his views, and I'd much rather understand him more than not know about him at all. This way, it's possible for people to discuss his views with him and try to explain why they're wrong, and one day, he might think differently. It's a waste of time to just mock him; this will only further alienate him from rational people. If we think his views are wrong, we should be able to explain why -- calling for his views to be suppressed makes it seem as if you're worried he might be right. 18.104.22.168 22:13, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) One, we're Wikinews, not Wikipedia. Secondly, it's part of the Wikinews charter that we adopt a Neutral Point of View, which applies as much to what stories we cover as what we cover in the stories, and I think it's great that we're getting to interview so many of the significant third-party candidates so that people at least know what alternatives will be on their ballot paper. Thirdly, personally I'd rather vote for Uga Man than this guy (if I were a US citizen, that is). Chris Mann (Say hi!|Stalk me!) 22:18, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
This is the featured article? Shame.
I understand Wikinews being an unbiased news source and all, but really. Interviewing a Nazi and making it the featured article? That's just wrong.
First off, several other independents have been interviewed over the last few weeks and I don't believe any of them have been the featured article.
Second, what that man said was offensive to several people of several different races (And no, this isn't coming from a minority). By posting that interview and giving it this kind of attention we're just giving this man free publicity.
Third, why on earth do we need to hear about a Nazi running for president? Sure everybody's entitled to run for office in America and have whichever views they like, but something like this doesn't need to make it into the mainstream.--WNewsReporter - (talk) 22:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- It's not the featured article, it's the fourth lead article, a position which is given to the most recent Wikinews interview - this is something that's been added to the main page recently, as opposed to just a list of recent interviews in the right-hand column, hence why it's the first such interview to get this recognition. Yes what he said was racist, but so was Pauline Hanson, and she managed to get a seat in the Australian parliament, so obviously there are people who listen to these kooks. And as much as I disagree with his views on race, I would say his thoughts on the Iraq War and health care sound carefully chosen to attract people who may be indifferent about the race issue but really don't want another Bush. The interview doesn't legitimise his views, but it does get them out in the open. Chris Mann (Say hi!|Stalk me!) 22:25, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
NO WONDER HE HAS NO CHANCE IN WINNING THIS ELECTION..
My fellow white brother, you could have at least kept all your negative opinions to yourself, lie a little at least. If you where elected president i can see ourselves going into MArshall Law. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 22:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
What a bunch of uneducated fools we have.Im willing to bet not 1 of you people talking down on this guy have any idea what the meaning of nationalsocialism is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 00:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
10 hours? An assassination. How much do you want to bet?
Stop making fun of him.
Had Bowles lived the late 19th-early 20th century, his ideas would have been received very well. Simply because the hippies of the 60's decided that racism was "unhip" he has no chance. Listen, whether you like it or not the founding fathers, and just about every president up to 1940 was a RACIST. The original immigration law said that only "free white persons" could enter the United States, and the only reason that there are so many nonwhites in the country is, about two thirds of it anyways, because of the 1965 immigration act. Listen, you dont have to vote for him, in fact I am not going to even do it. But don't just say that he's a "horrible Nazi", because that's disrespectful. Simply because Hitler made fascism unpopular does not mean that it's "bad". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 16:53, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- How it's "received" has nothing to do with it. If he'd lived in Germany in 1935 his ideas would have been received well, too -- that does nothing to justify them. Perhaps you misunderstand the word 'fascism', since the rest of your comment is about racism, but both racism and fascism are evil. Reeldyne - (talk) 15:49, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh come on, it's jolly good fun to make fun of him
Nazi morons deserve to be taunted by goose-stepping around in front of them with a comb under the nose, a dopey looking clown suit, and an outstretched arm. If for no other reason, then for the lulz. ("Heil Nazi, the Genocide Party!" Yeah, right. (rolls eyes)) 184.108.40.206 07:24, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you Wikinews!
I think it is wonderful, and a truly positive thing that Wikinews is interviewing such a wide array of people as it has lately. Those interviews with independent candidates in particular allow us all to - if we are open to it - seek to better understand the actual groups of people that surround us. I have read the neo-nazi and the "Mike Hukabee is a saint!" interviews so far, and I think it gives me insight on the various types of voters around. I live in Canada, and yet, so many white people, no doubting my indigenous African origins, will gladly tell me how they hate "niggers", "faggots", "jews", "ragheads", and so on. I really believe a much larger range of people are bigoted than may be generally perceived. So to get such an interview with him is helpful, as it helps understand why people think in such ways, and helps reinforce exactly WHY I DISAGREE with them. As for the Mike Hukabee fan guy, I thought it was interesting how... simple-minded he was. He did not sound smart at all, and I guess he represents many of the people who think they have the right interpretation of God, and that it should therefore define politics. Anyway, thank you interviewers and wikinews contributors for this work. 220.127.116.11
Wikinews interviews John Taylor Bowles, National Socialist Order of America candidate for US President
On the issues, Mr. Bowles is by far and away the best presidential candidate. Nonwhites commit millions of violent crimes against Whites each year, most of them racial in nature and therefore hate crimes. The federal government not only turns a blind eye to these anti-White crimes, they encourage them. To prove my point, the federal government honors two of the most anti-White, anti-American criminals that ever lived-Martin Luther King and Abraham Lincoln. King of course was a communist whose legacy lives on in the form of anti-White affirmative action, White flight, ghettos, black crime, welfare, black one-parent families, the high illiteracy and high school dropout rate by blacks and the incessant whining and playing the race card blacks do to get what they want. Abraham Lincoln was directly responsible for more White deaths in America than any one person. By choosing to prosecute a war against the White South, his legacy is no better than King's and possibly worse. Our Founding Fathers did not gain independence from a White empire for this nation to become a nonwhite empire. America was founded as a Republic with an established set of laws. America was run by Whites, for Whites and that is what America shall be again. Bowles for President. White Power.—18.104.22.168 21:45, 8 March 2008 (UTC)Walter Ring
This country WAS built by Whites FOR Whites
"The United States was not made as a country for white people. That is not what the Founding Fathers wanted. They wanted an inclusive place, where they people from everywhere could live without discrimination, as it says "All men are equal under God". There is a reason this guy won't be getting any place in the white house"
You are as big a moron as you claim John Bowles is. Our Founding Fathers created a law called the Naturalization Act of 1790 that only allowed free White people to become citizens. This left out even White indentured servants. These are our Founding Fathers' beliefs, that America was a nation FOR Whites, BY Whites. White Power.—22.214.171.124 21:53, 8 March 2008 (UTC)Walter Ring
Racism at it's finest
This fellow needs to be psycologically evaluated...
hes already got my vote but.....
what about the 1 sided trade practices this country has been duped into,the lack of industry,and the unfair taxation. maybe the answers to that are in the ss hand book. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 00:36, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Seriously, this guy has some good points. It's blacks that make up 12% of the USA population, yet commit 50% of the crime. By 2050, whites will be a minority in the USA, despite the fact we build it up.