Is GOP Still a National Party?

Is GOP Still a National Party?

By Patrick J. Buchanan

As President Barack Obama delivers his inaugural address to a nation filled with anticipation and hope, the vital signs of the loyal opposition appear worse than worrisome.

The new majority of 49 states and 60 percent of the nation Nixon cobbled together in 1972, that became the Reagan coalition of 49 states and 60 percent of the nation in 1984, is a faded memory. Demographically, philosophically and culturally, the party base has been shrinking since Bush I won his 40-state triumph over Michael Dukakis. Indeed, the Republican base is rapidly becoming a redoubt, a Fort Apache in Indian country.

In the National Journal, Ron Brownstein renders a grim prognosis of the party’s chances of recapturing the White House. Consider:

In the five successive presidential elections, beginning with Clinton’s victory in 1992 and ending with Obama’s in 2008, 18 states and the District of Columbia, with 248 electoral votes among them, voted for the Democratic ticket all five times. John McCain did not come within 10 points of Obama in any of the 18, and he lost D.C. 92-8.

The 18 cover all of New England, save New Hampshire; New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Maryland; four of the major states in the Midwest—Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin and Minnesota; and the Pacific Coast states of California, Oregon, Washington and Hawaii.

Three other states—Iowa, New Hampshire and New Mexico—have gone Democratic in four of the past five presidential contests. And Virginia and Colorado have ceased to be reliably red.

Not only are the 18 hostile terrain for any GOP presidential ticket, Republicans hold only three of their 36 Senate seats and fewer than 1 in 3 of their House seats. “Democrats also control two-thirds of these 18 governorships, every state House chamber, and all but two of the state Senates,” writes Brownstein.[Dems Find Electoral Safety Behind A Wall Of Blue, January 17, 2009(Subscriber content)]

In many of the 18, the GOP has ceased to be competitive. In the New England states, for example, there is not a single Republican congressman. In New York, there are only three.

“State by state, election by election,” says Brownstein, “Democrats since 1992 have constructed the party’s largest and most durable Electoral College base in more than half a century. Call it the blue wall.”

While that Democratic base is not yet as decisive as the Nixon-Reagan base in the South, and the Plains and Mountain States, it is becoming so solidified it may block any Republican from regaining the White House, in the absence of a catastrophically failed Democratic president.

What does the Republican base look like?

In the same five presidential contests, from 1992 to 2008, Republicans won 13 states all five times. But the red 13 have but 93 electoral votes, fewer than a third of the number in “the blue wall.”

What has been happening to the GOP? Three fatal contractions.

Demographically, the GOP is a party of white Americans, who in 1972 were perhaps 90 percent of the national vote. Nixon and Reagan rolled up almost two-thirds of that vote in 1972 and 1984. But because of abortion and aging, the white vote is shrinking as a share of the national vote and the population.

The minorities that are growing most rapidly, Hispanics and Asians, cast 60 to 70 percent of their presidential votes for the Democratic Party. Black Americans vote 9-1 for national Democrats. In 2008, they went 30-1.

Put succinctly, the red pool of voters is aging, shrinking and dying, while the blue pool, fed by high immigration and a high birth rate among immigrants, is steadily expanding.

Philosophically, too, the country is turning away from the GOP creed of small government and low taxes. Why?

Nearly 90 percent of immigrants, legal and illegal, are Third World poor or working-class and believe in and rely on government for help with health and housing, education and welfare. Second, tax cuts have dropped nearly 40 percent of wage earners from the tax rolls.

If one pays no federal income tax but reaps a cornucopia of benefits, it makes no sense to vote for the party of less government.

The GOP is overrepresented among the taxpaying class, while the Democratic Party is overrepresented among tax consumers. And the latter are growing at a faster rate than the former.

Lastly, Democrats are capturing a rising share of the young and college-educated, who are emerging from schools and colleges where the values of the counterculture on issues from abortion to same-sex marriage to affirmative action have become the new orthodoxy.

The Republican “lock” on the presidency, crafted by Nixon, and patented by Reagan, has been picked. The only lingering question is whether an era of inexorable Republican decline has set in.

No Evidence Workers Leaving U.S.

No Evidence Workers Leaving U.S.

More news stories on Hispanic Immigrants

Susan Ferriss, Sacramento Bee, January 15, 2009

Flor Gutierrez has a bird’s eye view of how immigrants—37 percent of California’s labor force—are reacting so far to a punishing recession.

She runs El Mercadito Latino in Elk Grove, where Mexicans and Central Americans shop and wire money to family back in their home countries. In December, she said, customers wired the same amount of money as they always have during a holiday month. But Gutierrez is bracing for a plunge.

“They definitely are buying less for themselves,” she said. “We may see people getting by with less here, so they can continue to help out those back home who are even worse off.”

Gutierrez’s observations mirror what researchers at the Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan Washington, D.C., think tank, describe in a report issued Wednesday.

“Immigrants and the Current Economic Crisis” reviews statistical research and other information and concludes that there is no hard evidence of illegal or legal immigrants leaving in droves because jobs have dried up.

In addition to agriculture, immigrants are concentrated in construction, manufacturing and services, industries that have been battered by the downturn.

No doubt, tough times have already prompted some to leave U.S. soil and produced a “flattening” in the estimated number of illegal immigrants entering to seek jobs since 2007, said Demetrios Papademetriou, president of the Migration Policy Institute, which studies U.S. and global migration trends and policies.

But home countries, especially those tightly linked to the U.S. economy, such as Mexico and those in Central America, are not hospitable places to search for work, either.

Drug trafficking violence and crime in Mexico are disincentives to returning, as is immigrants’ strong sense of responsibility to provide for family, the report says.

{snip}

Researchers contend that U.S. policies encourage undocumented workers to remain in the United States and cling to whatever work they can find and wait out a downturn. In contrast, they say, the European Union’s policy of free transit for EU citizens affords migrant workers “the ease of circulation.”

{snip}

Spain, Papademetriou [Demetrios Papademetriou, president of the Migration Policy Institute] said, is in a fix comparable to the United States. Africans and South Americans were drawn to work there, legally and illegally, when the economy was healthy.

Now, the immigrants don’t want to leave because they don’t have a guarantee they could ever return.

{snip}

[Editor’s Note: “Immigrants and the Current Economic Crisis,” by Demetrios G. Papademetriou and Aaron Terrazas, can be read or downloaded as a PDF file here.]

Original article

Email Susan Ferriss at sferriss@sacbee.com.

(Posted on January 16, 2009)

New Report: Legal, Illegal Immigration Flows React Differently to Recession; Return Migration, Though Probably Up, Is Not Yet a Definitive Trend

Migration Policy Institute, January 14, 2009

Press Release
January 14, 2009
Contact: Michelle Mittelstadt
202-266-1910
mmittelstadt@migrationpolicy.org

WASHINGTON—With the United States in an economic crisis that may already be the worst since the Great Depression, a report issued today by the Migration Policy Institute finds that the recession may produce differing results for legal and illegal immigration flows.

The report, Immigrants and the Current Economic Crisis, cites a growing body of evidence suggesting there has been a measurable slowdown in the historic growth of immigration in the United States, largely because there has been no significant growth in the unauthorized immigrant population since 2006.

“Legal and illegal immigration flows respond differently in an economic crisis,” said Migration Policy Institute President Demetrios Papademetriou, an author of the report. “Legal permanent immigration flows are the least responsive to economic pressures, while illegal immigration flows are the most responsive.”

“Still, substantial return migration of unauthorized immigrants is unlikely unless there’s a protracted and severe worsening of the U.S. economy,” Papademetriou added.

The report examines the effects of the economic crisis and factors such as immigration enforcement on the immigrant population already in the United States; predicts how future immigration flows may be affected; discusses how immigrants fare in the U.S. labor market during recessions; and offers possible policy prescriptions.

Among the report’s findings:

* While there is anecdotal evidence that return migration to some countries, including Mexico, appears to have increased there is no definitive trend so far that can be tied in a significant way to U.S. economic conditions.

* Suggestions that increasingly strict enforcement of immigration laws by federal, state and local officials is responsible for increased return migration appear to be premature. With enforcement differing from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, selective enforcement strategies are likely to first divert unauthorized immigrants to other destinations within the United States where economic opportunities exist rather than induce them to leave the country.

* Return migration appears to correlate more closely with economic, political and social developments in countries of origin than with economic conditions in the United States.

* While immigrants on average share the demographic characteristics of the workers who are most vulnerable during recessions (including relative youth, lower levels of education and recent entry into the labor force), they also may be able to adjust more quickly than native-born workers to fluctuating labor market conditions because they are more amenable to moving and changing job sectors.

* The lack of access to public benefits and family obligations (such as sending remittances to relatives in the country of origin) may force immigrant workers to go to extraordinary lengths to remain employed or find new employment quickly, possibly pushing some into dangerous working conditions or informal work.

* Legal immigration appears least tied to U.S. economic conditions because most legal immigrants in recent years have been status adjusters who already live in the United States and tend to have strong labor market ties; there is a pent-up demand for employer-sponsored visas; about two-thirds of legal immigrants are coming to reunite with family on visas that, in many cases, took years to secure; and refugee and asylee flows are largely independent of the economic climate.

“Illegal immigration is more responsive to economic downturns than legal immigration because it is comprised overwhelmingly of economic migrants whose decisions to migrate are based on their ability to find work,” said report co-author Aaron Terrazas, an MPI Research Assistant.

The report offers a number of policy suggestions that could make the U.S. immigration system more responsive to U.S. labor market and economic needs, among them the creation of a Standing Commission on Immigration and Labor Markets that would provide recommendations to Congress and the administration on adjustments to admissions levels based on labor market needs, employment patterns and changing economic and demographic trends.

“While the current economic crisis might not seem the most opportune moment to fix the chronic disconnect between the U.S. labor market and immigration system, visionary policymakers will recognize that a more nimble and thoughtful immigration system would better serve U.S. economic interests in an ever-more competitive global marketplace,” Papademetriou said.

The report, the first research product of MPI’s new Labor Markets Initiative, is available online at: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/lmi_recessionJan09.pdf

U.S. School Segregation on the Rise: Report

U.S. School Segregation on the Rise: Report

More news stories on Race in Schools

Matthew Bigg, Reuters, January 14, 2009

Black and Latino students are educated in U.S. schools that are increasingly segregated, said a report Wednesday that undercuts optimism about race in America surrounding the presidency of Barack Obama.

Blacks and Hispanics are more separate from white students than at any time since the civil rights movement and many of the schools they attend are struggling, said the report by the Civil Rights Project at the University of California.

A 2007 Supreme Court decision on voluntary desegregation is likely to intensify the trend because it reduces pressure on local authorities to promote school desegregation, said the report, which called on Obama to address the issue.

{snip}

Orfield said these trends were “the result of a systematic neglect of civil rights policy and related educational and community reforms for decades.”

Part of the reason is demographic. As the percentage of white students shrinks—they now make up 56 percent of the school population—they are more integrated with students who are nonwhite.

Another factor is that residential segregation, on the rise in many parts of the country, increasingly determines the racial composition in schools in the absence of measures by education authorities to create and maintain integrated schools, Orfield said.

At the same time, Orfield said little had been done in recent years to prosecute violations of the Fair Housing Act, which forbids discrimination in the allocation of housing and was set up to foster equality in the housing market.

As a result of the trend, 39 percent of black students and 40 percent of students from the fast-growing Latino minority are increasingly isolated in schools in which there is little racial mixing, the report said.

{snip}

The report also found that the average black and Latino student is now in a school that has nearly 60 percent of students from families who are near or below the poverty line.

{snip}

[Editor’s Note: “Reviving the Goal of an Integrated Society: A 21st Century Challenge,” by Gary Orfield, can be read or downloaded as a PDF file here.]

Original article

(Posted on January 16, 2009)

Press Release: School Resegregation and Civil Rights Challenges for the Obama Administration: A New Report from the Civil Rights Project at UCLA

Civil Rights Project, January 14, 2009

Civil Rights Project, January 14, 2009

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Gary Orfield: (617) 359-2892, (310) 267-4877, orfield@gmail.com
Erica Frankenberg: ericafrankenberg@gmail.com
Laurie Russman: (310) 267-5562, larussman@gmail.com

Los Angeles—January 14, 2009—As the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday and the Inauguration of this nation’s first African American President approach, the nation is in a celebratory mood about progress on race relations. The election of Barack Obama is a breakthrough that would have been unimaginable a half century ago and a triumph of the long movement for racial justice. But a new report from the Civil Rights Project, Reviving the Goal of an Integrated Society: A 21st Century Challenge, points out that it would be wrong to assume that our nation has now realized Dr. King’s dream and created a society where race no longer matters. In fact, the report concludes the opposite: the U.S. continues to move backward toward increasing minority segregation in highly unequal schools; the job situation remains especially bleak for American blacks, and Latinos have a college completion rate that is shockingly low. At the same time, very little is being done to address large scale challenges such as continuing discrimination in the housing and home finance markets, among other differences across racial lines.

The report’s author, Professor Gary Orfield, commented, “It would be a tragedy if the country assumed from the Obama election that the problems of race have been solved, when many inequalities are actually deepening. The lesson to take from this is that we have elected a brilliant president, who is the product of excellent integrated schools and colleges. We should work hard to extend such opportunities to and develop the talents of the millions of blacks and Latinos who still face isolation and denial of an equal chance. The outgoing administration has left the machinery of civil rights justice and educational equity in a shambles and strong leadership will be needed to restore it.”

For more than a decade, the Civil Rights Project has been issuing regular reports on the nation’s progress in realizing the goal of the Brown decision and the historic 1964 Civil Rights ActÑthe aim that the nation end separate but unequal education and create schools that are integrated and successful for all children. Very large progress was made during the civil rights era but it is slipping away year by year. Since the Supreme Court reversed course in 1991 and authorized return to segregated neighborhood schools, there has been an increase in segregation every year, particularly for black and Latino students. The report shows that 40% of Latinos and 39% of blacks now attend intensely segregated schools. The average black and Latino student is now in a school that has nearly 60% of students from families who are near or below the poverty line. These doubly segregated schools by race and poverty have weaker teaching forces, much more student instability, more students who come to school not speaking English and many other characteristics related to family and neighborhood poverty and isolation that make for challenging educational environments. These are the schools where much of the nation’s dropout crisis is concentrated. More than 40 years after passage of the Fair Housing Act, there continues to be almost no serious enforcement against widespread housing discrimination, which impacts the segregation in districts with neighborhood school policies, and is making it difficult to maintain integration in suburbia.

The country has experienced a large increase in students attending multiracial schools, defined here as schools with more than a tenth of students from each of three or more racial groups. These are schools that can either be integrated across racial and class lines or schools that combine three highly impoverished communities of different racial backgrounds. They offer both challenges and possibilities, but almost no attention is being paid to studying them or to developing curriculum and training to help realize their possibilities. The substantial increase of whites attending multiracial schoolsÑthe percentage of white students in such schools has doubled in less than two decadesÑ may well be one of the reasons why whites tend to believe that progress is being made on integration even as segregation deepens, on average, for black and Latino students.

The report also indicates that the frontier of racial change and school resegregation is now in the suburbs, where about a third of black and Latino students attend school. Even though there is a large white majority in suburban schools, two million black and Latino suburban students currently attend highly segregated schools. By contrast, only 2% of suburban white students attend these same segregated minority schools, while a majority attends suburban schools with at least 80% of white students. After two decades of a hostile Supreme Court and two terms of a presidency committed to reversing civil rights gains, only the nation’s small towns and rural areas retain substantially integrated schools.

The report concludes that efforts to make separate schools equal, which have been the dominant approach since the federal government abandoned significant positive support for integration almost three decades ago, have failed. This failure includes No Child Left Behind, which was supposed to quickly equalize achievement across racial lines but has fallen far short. Instead, it is sanctioning scores of segregated minority schools without providing them enough help to make a difference. The report notes that too often the high hopes accompanying a racial change in leadershipÑwhen, for example, black or Latino mayors and school superintendents were first appointed—were often disappointed since the underlying racial barriers to opportunity were not addressed. Orfield, the report’s author, calls on the incoming Obama Administration to “make the first serious commitment since President Johnson’s Administration and build successfully integrated communities and schools wherever there are feasible opportunities.” The report includes a discussion of a number of possible tools and techniques with the potential to extend past successes. Finally, the report calls on the new administration and Congress to review the evidence and provide the needed leadership, for example, to support integrated communities and to avoid the large-scale ghettoization of suburbia.

About The Civil Rights Project at UCLA

Founded in 1996 by former Harvard professors Gary Orfield and Christopher Edley Jr., the Civil Rights Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles is now co-directed by Orfield and Patricia Gándara, professors at UCLA. Its mission is to create a new generation of research in social science and law, on the critical issues of civil rights and equal opportunity for racial and ethnic groups in the United States. It has commissioned more than 400 studies, published 14 books and issued numerous reports from authors at universities and research centers across the country. The Supreme Court, in its 2003 Grutter v. Bollinger decision upholding affirmative action, cited the Civil Rights Project’s research. The CRP’s Initiative on School Integration, which conducted this research, is made possible with the support of the Open Society Institute and the Ford Foundation.

Original article


Comments

Again, what are they proposing to do? After all, white ethnonationalism isn’t that big because so many whites are able to flee the problem. If the “Civil Rights Project of the University of California” has anything to do with it, there will be desegregation on a level that will boggle the minds of even its proponents. That will only serve to re-energize the white racial right wing, Council of Conservative Citizens et al.

Perhaps part of the problem is the Civil Rights Project’s perspective. There are hardly any white school aged children left in the big cities of California, so of course blacks and Hispanics are going to be isolated because they’re the only children.

Posted by Question Diversity at 6:57 PM on January 16


Legislation can easily fix this just like the laws that keep schools safe from guns and drugs out of the hands of college students. Yes! that will fix the problem, more laws, more legislation; politicians always fix our problems.

Posted by MW at 7:00 PM on January 16


Black & latino students may be getting more isolated from white students, but white students are NOT isolated from black & latino students. There just aren’t enough whites to guarantee that every minority student gets to sit in a “perfectly” integrated classroom. Almost all whites attend integrated schools and all who do have suffered terribly from the collapse in academic standards caused by the presence of blacks and latinos. White students suffer as well from the social pathologies which blacks and latinos introduce into any environment in which they are present: violence, degraded language, misogyny, sexual aggression & promiscuity, and many other things familiar to the parents of white students in integrated schools. Tragically, there are very few, if any, all white schools left in this nation, due to the efforts of do-gooders like Gary Orfield.

Posted by Beau Martin at 7:31 PM on January 16


While the article mentions the fact that only 56 percent of school kids are white, it completely ignores the fact that a good many of the white students attend private schools.

This means that a majority of the kids in public schools nationwide are either black or Hispanic. It is funny how they do not see black and Hispanic as racial integration.

Of course, it is not racial integration that they really want to talk about…..otherwise black and Hispanic would fit the bill perfectly. What they want instead is ECONOMIC integration, that is why they do not mention all the low and working class whites that still attend public schools. Why? Because they are so few.

Here in Texas, any Hispanic that attends local schools for two years is classified as WHITE. I took a job in Burnet, outside of Austin, where the official statistics said the local schools were 5 percent Hispanic. When I went to pick up my kids at school, it looked more like 50 percent Hispanic. So I asked the Superintendent and that is what he told me…..after two years, they are no longer Hispanic….they are WHITE.

Don’t worry, sugar. There is plenty of racial integration in public schools.

Posted by Memphomaniac at 8:11 PM on January 16


S.E.G.R.E.G.A.T.I.O.N.= “Schools Entering ‘Ghettoization’ Repel Euro-americans -Getting A Teaching In Overt Non-civilization”

Posted by White is beautiful Robert at 8:48 PM on January 16


The Hispanic situation is EASILY remedied: deportation and the passing of legislation clarifying that anchor babies born to illegals are not US citizens.

The Black situation is problematic because Blacks WANT segregation and will assault ANY non-blacks in a school setting to put them in their place.

Posted by Anonymous at 9:14 PM on January 16


Gary Orfield? I wonder if he is related to Myron Orfield, a goofball who used to run a messy office at the University of Minnesota called the Institute on Race and Poverty. Myron made a career out of harrassing white people with school integration. If so, must be the family business.

Posted by Civilized Neighbor at 9:23 PM on January 16


Required liberal weasel words when talking about schools and race:

1. “Segregated”: Although it can mean something that happens passively and impersonally, the liberal requirement is to imply that it is being done on purpose and in an unfair way. And that action is needed to reverse it. The word “separated” is not allowed because that implies a neutral point of view.

2. “Integrated”: This means that a school has a mixture of races. But (as Memphomaniac points out) it is only used to mean that whites and blacks are mixed together. A school with blacks, Hispanics, and Asians, but no whites, is not integrated. “Integrated” is the final desirable state of things being mixed together to form a unified whole— the word “completed” could almost be used in its place.

Posted by Reader-1 at 11:20 PM on January 16


How ironic is it that the whole stimulus that got White America into its current (irretrievable) morass was the Brown vs. Board of Education decision roughly 50 years ago.
And of course the instigators of that action succeeded, succeeded beyond their wildest dreams! Not content with getting their way (and more with affirmation action privelege legally giving them ‘protected’ status), they got to destroy whitey!, yes destroy big, evil whitey the oppressor and slave-driver! – you see, whitey’s kids are only 56% of the popualtion and will vanish to nothingness soon.
So a nice pice of judicious activism, wailing and gnashing of teeth, screaming, shouting and stamping your feet and getting the ‘great and good’ to back you to the hilt yields the richest of dividends.
There must be a moral in that somewhere.

Posted by Kenelm Digby at 8:42 AM on January 17


well, you see not all the news is bad. now we just have to seal off primarily white schools from the “segregated” schools. We’re back where we started, and maybe America can regain an educated core of citizens who can invent the products of the future and run a civilized society.

Or, perhaps the Great Leader Obama will require us to live in black or hispanic areas to “integrate” the schools.

Time for a new Constitution.

Posted by Anonymous at 9:04 AM on January 17


My kid’s school is mostly white with about 25% minority. The school programs always have to include a little bit of rap and of course they worship Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks. My daughter is already “getting hit on” by an aggressive mestizo and she’s only 9. Also these little elementary school kids are using the “f” word already. Yes my kids are very integrated in our multiculturalist society and it’s distressing.

Posted by Anonymous at 9:51 AM on January 17


Yea they whine and build them brand new schools with white tax dollars and within a couple years the place is trashed and the sub par scholastics never change with the same crime etc.
Busing didnt work, new schools and throwing billions at the problem didnt work.
The next step is to take down whitey. Damn those white racists doing better in schools and everything else.

Posted by Anonymous at 9:55 AM on January 17


More Marxist Common Purpose lunatic claptrap and barefaced deceit.

Segregation is natural and for the protection of vulnerable ethnicities like whites, it should be made mandatory.

The sooner this whole deranged Marxist deck of cards collapses the better then we can all get back to following what nature intended – segregated living spaces and in separate territories.

Forced integration is criminal and it’s white families who are being pressed into submitting to it.

“The substantial increase of whites attending multiracial schoolsÑthe percentage of white students in such schools has doubled in less than two decadesÑ may well be one of the reasons why whites tend to believe that progress is being made on integration even as segregation deepens, on average, for black and Latino students.”

1. If white attendance has doubled, the reason will be because more and more white parents are losing their jobs to cheap labour non-whites and non-white illegals alike, leaving them no choice but to send their children to multi-culti hell holes or be prosecuted for non-attendance.

2. The only gull-heads to go on believe progress is being made even though they themselves admit to a deepening of black and Latino segregation, are brainwashed and deranged white Marxist Liberals with an agenda, not your average man in the street who has far more intelligence, it would appear.

“By contrast, only 2% of suburban white students attend these same segregated minority schools, while a majority attends suburban schools with at least 80% of white students.”

The only reason the 2% of white children attend mixed non-white minority schools at all, is very obviously because they’re children from low income/welfare families who can’t afford to send them to surburban schools in the first place which proves the reality that,

Birds of a feather………

“The report also indicates that the frontier of racial change and school resegregation is now in the suburbs, where about a third of black and Latino students attend school.”

Proving that integration is unnatural. Even well-to-do black and Latino parents want their children to attend segregated schools.

Wakey, wakey, you wacko Marxist Liberal clowns! Remember,

Communism in the guise of Liberalism, is as much an anachorism and abomination to other cultures as it is to white European culture(s), the collective founding culture, by the way.

Finally, Martin Luther’s dream was just that – a dream. He obviously lacked the intelligence to comprehend that such a dream is unnatural in the first instance and besides, he was a Communist with an agenda too, ie, the genocide of white people chiefly through miscegenation.

Posted by A Swain at 10:25 AM on January 17


The most widely used measure of segregation is the dissimilarity index. Yet, nowhere in this article above do I see mention of it. The authors of the report are waving their hands and not using correct statistical methodology, in my opinion.

At one point they say that today a majority of white children attend schools that are over 80% white. And somehow this statements is supposed to help prove that there is more segregation today. I’ve looked up the statistics myself from nces.ed.gov/ccd and I can tell you that from a white child’s perspective, public schools are progressively getting more racially integrated every year. But the UCLA authors don’t give us a specific year-by-year comparison in their data. They are quoting numbers without telling us how they are relevant or where they came from.

Posted by Anonymous at 1:04 PM on January 17


Re Myron Orfield…I knew the guy. He and his family are pretty well off and his father made a small fortune in real estate in Minneapolis. I don’t know exactly how but I heard it was through manipulations in section 8 housing. The guy is not to be believed. He is one of those white guys with nothing better to do than cry for the blacks so much someone listens and gives him a cushy civil service job. He went to the U of Chicago and probably picked up his moves from the same “radicals” who got rich organizing communities.
Amazing, isn’t it, to hear how whitey’s kids are responsible for black and brown failure by merely going to the school of their choice. Are the white kids supposed to the black kids’ homework, too?

Posted by jim at 4:43 PM on January 17


One of the previous posters noted the increase in the number of white children attending non-public schools. There has also been a huge increase in the number of white children being home-schooled.

But I have never seen any statistics on the percentage of WHITE children who are now outside the public school system. The statistics that I have seen in the past always seemed to indicate that the percentage of children (of all races) attending private/parochial schools in America was holding steady at around 8 or 9%. The only way that I can see this being true is if the number of white Catholics sending their children to Catholic school has slowly declined in sync with the number of white protestants opting for home schooling or private/parochial schools.

Does anybody have any information on that?

Posted by Anonymous at 11:29 PM on January 17


In Chicago they have basically given up on intergration, outside of the magnet schools there basically are no white kids except in some isolated elementary schools which are mainly white neighborhoods. The radicals being only anti-white allow the regular high schools to re-segregate to save on the police budget of keeping gang bangers apart.

Posted by Simmons at 12:33 AM on January 18


Why don’t they just say it,they can’t make it without whites being at the helm!

Posted by Billy at 4:33 PM on January 18


“Blacks and Hispanics are more separate from white students than at any time since the civil rights movement and many of the schools they attend are struggling, said the report by the Civil Rights Project at the University of California.”

Well, if that nonsense upsets this yellow journalist and his liberal rag, try this on for size: There’s going to even be MORE segregation from whites. Of course, he can help by sending his rug rats to a school in the ghetto so they can learn first hand the joys of diversity.

Posted by q at 9:04 PM on January 18


Thank Wotan that we are less mixed now than before. If their schools fail, it is because they make them fail. Non whites, orientals withstanding, are not intellectual and preform poorly in schools. It is not the segregation that ruins the schools, but the presence of non whites that ruin them.

Posted by johannbraun at 9:42 PM on January 18


About kids attending private schools…did you know that one of the complaints about Catholic and other Christian schools is they don’t act Christian? These religious schools are bringing in more white students then ever before, and a portion of them aren’t Christian. A lot of schools are “toning down” to accommodate them. That’s a different issue than the one in this article, but its source is the influx of white students escaping integrated public schools.

Parents used to send their kids to private schools either to get a top notch education or to receive a specific, religious education. Now we have atheists sending their children to Catholic school just so they can escape the Africans and mestizos in the public setting. And people praise diversity so fervently…

Posted by Mike at 12:27 AM on January 19


“…that our nation has [not yet] realized Dr. King’s dream and created a society where race no longer matters.”

Even after the evidence of almost 50 years, Civil Rights Project gerbels Gary Orfield, Erica Frankenberg, and Laurie Russman keep spinning inside their little doctrinaire mind wheels believing there is sinister outside social villany at work preventing complete school integration – when what causes it to be rejected by parents and whole communities is their real knowledge of the disasterous results of school integration.

Parents saw the poor, often vile quality of experience inflicted on their children while in integrated schools, and [those who could] quite responsibly moved their kids to a decent learning environment.

That is the ‘villanous instinct’ the insufferably self-righteous Civil Rights Project types wish to crush – via government force.

Posted by Gary at 2:45 PM on January 19


Mike at 12:27 is right, many Catholic schools are getting lots of non-Catholics these days, and we all know why. I have a couple students that I’ve begun to talk to about racial issues. My starting point was the fact that their school has all these kids with liberal parents who talk diversity but won’t live it. They saw the contradiction right away. It was as if I’d answered a question they’d been afraid to ask.

Posted by Schoolteacher at 3:00 PM on January 19


“…Parents used to send their kids to private schools either to get a top notch education or to receive a specific, religious education. Now we have atheists sending their children to Catholic school just so they can escape the Africans and mestizos in the public setting. And people praise diversity so fervently…

Posted by Mike at 12:27 AM on January 19”

During the Vietnam War, there were Vietnamese people who were referred to as “rice Christians” (according to one person quoted in Everything We Had, by Al Santoli.) That is, if you’ve got the rice, I’ll pretend to be a Christian to get some of it.

The Catholic high school in my city must be doing this in reverse. If you’ve got the “rice” (money), we’ll let you be Christian. They’ve got every race, religion, and sexual persuasion going there. This particular school also has a cadre of hard-left indoctrinators/instructors, one of which I helped to get fired when she stood up in her own class (in a Catholic high school, remember) and said that the “church is a whore.”

Posted by Wild Eyed Charlie at 6:37 PM on January 19

Antiforeigner Discrimination is a Right for Japanese People

Antiforeigner Discrimination is a Right for Japanese People

More news stories on Japan

Gregory Clark, Japan Times, Jan. 15, 2009

“Japan girai”—dislike of Japan—is an allergy that seems to afflict many Westerners here. If someone handing out Japanese-language flyers assumes they cannot read Japanese and ignores them, they cry racial discrimination. If they are left sitting alone in a train, they assume that is because the racist Japanese do not want to sit next to foreigners. If someone does sit next to them and tries to speak to them in English, they claim more discrimination, this time because it is assumed they cannot speak Japanese.

Normally these people do little harm. In their gaijin ghettoes they complain about everything from landlords reluctant to rent to foreigners (igno ring justified landlord fear of the damage foreigners can cause) to use of the word “gaijin” (forgetting the way some English speakers use the shorter and sometimes discriminatory word “foreigner” rather than “foreign national.”). A favorite complaint is that Japanese universities discriminate against foreigners. How many Western universities would employ, even as simple language teachers, foreigners who could not speak, write and read the national language?

Recently they have revived the story of how they bravely abolished antiforeigner discrimination from bathhouses in the port town of Otaru in Hokkaido. Since I was closely involved, allow me to throw some extra light on that affair.

An onsen manager who allegedly had earlier been driven to near bankruptcy by badly behaved Russian sailors had decided this time to bar all foreigners fr om his new enterprise. The activist then filed a suit for mental distress and won ¥3 million in damages. In the Zeit Gist and letter pages of this newspaper, some have criticized these excessively zealous moves by the activists. These critics in turn have been labeled as favoring Nazi-style discrimination and mob rule. Maybe it is ti me to bring some reality to this debate.

Otaru had been playing host to well over 20,000 Russian sailors a year, most arriving in small rust-bucket ships to deliver timber and pick up secondhand cars. I visited the wharves there, and as proof I harbor no anti-Russian feeling let me add that I speak Russian and enjoyed talking to these earthy, rough-hewn people i n their own language. Even so, the idea of them demanding freedom to walk into any onsen bathhouse of their choice, especially to a high-class onsen like Yunohana, is absurd.

The antidiscrimination activists say bathhouse managers can solve all problems by barring drunken sailors. But how do you apply a drunk test? And how do you throw out a drunk who has his foot in the door? Besides, drunken behavior is not the only bathhouse problem with these Otaru sailors. I can understand well why regular Japanese customers seeking the quiet Japanese-style camaraderie of the traditional Japanese bathhouse would want to flee an invasion of noisy, bathhouse-ignorant foreigners. And since it is not possible to bar only Russians, barring all foreigners is the only answer.

The antidiscrimination people point to Japan’s acceptance of a U.N. edict banning discrimination on the basis of race. But that edict is broken every time any U.S. organization obeys the affirmative action law demanding preference for blacks and other minorities. Without it, U.S. President-elect Barack Obama would probably not be where he is today.

Malaysia has also ignored it, with its Bumiputra policy of favoring Malays over Chinese and other minorities. There are dozens more examples of societies deciding to favor one group of people over others in order to preserve solidarity or prevent injustices. A large chain of barbershops in Japan has signs saying service is denied to those who do not speak Japanese. Non-Japanese speakers probably cause much less harm to a business than delinquent Russians. But we do not see our activists in action there.

The activists say there should be action to educate Russian sailors in bathhouse behavior. But do we see any of the activists in the friendship societies where worthy Japanese citizens try to ease problems for foreigners living here? Not as far as I know. Presumably close contact with these citizens would also upset their Japan-girai feelings.

In Otaru the obvious answer from the beginning was to create a seamen’s club similar to those that exist in many major ports. But here too the activists were very silent. It seems they prefer to move against weak targets where they can gain publicity with a minimum of effort. One result, either of the intensity of their beliefs or of their self-aggrandizement urges, is the vitriol they pour on those who have criticized their actions.

Sometimes their activism goes beyond even the absurd. Japan has long had a real problem of clever Chinese and Korean criminals taking advantage of Japan’ s lack of theft awareness to pick the locks and pockets of unsuspecting citizens. But when the authorities try to raise this problem, they too are accused of antiforeigner discrimination. Even companies advertising pick-proof locks are labeled as discriminators if they mention the Chinese lock-picking problem.

Obviously Japan needs precautions against these theft experts. Many, myself included, dislike the fingerprinting of foreigners at airports. But this too is needed to stop criminally minded foreigners from re-entering Japan after they have been caught and expelled. If anything the authorities are too lenient with these people. (Let me add that I also have no anti-China feeling; I speak Chinese too.)

It is time we admitted that at times the Japanese have the right to discriminate against some foreigners. If they do not, and Japan ends up like our padlocked, mutually suspicious Western societies, we will all be the losers.

Gregory Clark is vice president of Akita International University. A Japanese translation of this article will appear on http://www.gregoryclark.net.

Den Neuen Lebensraum

Den Neuen Lebensraum

by Baron Bodissey

The Fjordman Report
The noted blogger Fjordman is filing this report via Gates of Vienna.
For a complete Fjordman blogography, see The Fjordman Files. There is also a multi-index listing here.

This essay is compiled from comments Fjordman made on an earlier post.

Note: Since this post was published, Fjordman has added some more material, which may be found at the bottom of this essay.

I’ve asked this question before: Suppose the natives in some Western European countries actually start to seriously resisting the organized destruction of their countries, halt mass immigration and reverse Multiculturalism. How will American authorities and media react to this?

Frankly, I wouldn’t be too surprised if they turn out to be actively hostile to native Europeans. That was the case with Clinton and with Bush, who after all supported the continued Islamization of Europe through Turkish membership of the European Union. It will be even worse with Obama, an anti-white Marxist.

As we know, a “Nazi” these days is not one of the many Muslims and their Leftist cheerleaders who shout “Death to Jews! in the streets of Europe; it’s any white person who doesn’t lie down and die on command. If we don’t lie down and die, we must be Nazis. We are after all Europeans.

We should reach out to American individuals. They are victims of the same Multiculturalist war against European civilization as we are. But we should expect no sympathy from the American media and political elites. They are a hostile entity just as much as the EU elites are.
- – - - – - – - -
Europeans have learned the wrong lessons from Nazism, not the right ones. For instance, the European Union is now actively and deliberately promoting Islamic immigration to Europe by the tens of millions, knowing fully well that they will gradually displace the original inhabitants of the continent. Indeed, they desire this.

They also know that the people who move in have a culture of extreme anti-Semitism and despise Christianity, just as the Nazis did. Eurabianism has disturbing similarities with Nazism in some ways and with Communism in others.

The EU is promoting Lebensraum for a new master race in Europe just like the Nazis did. They just disagree on which master race to promote. The resurgence of violent anti-Semitism in Europe is directly caused by the policies of the European Union and the national political elites in Belgium and elsewhere. To hear them denounce others as “Fascists” or “anti-Semites” is the ultimate fraud.

We do have a powerful Fascist organization in Europe today: it’s called the European Union.


Update: Additional notes from Fjordman:

With the possible exception of Sweden, France, and Belgium (which is dominated by a French-speaking political elite), the English-speaking world is leading the disintegration of the West, ideologically and demographically. All of the West is sick, but the Anglosphere is sicker than most. The English-speaking countries still have the most dynamic military traditions of the West, but that counts for little as long as they are used for promoting global Multiculturalism rather than protecting the home country.

I cannot see that the Anglosphere has more freedom of speech, either. The USA does, at least for a while longer (we’ll see what the Black Messiah does about that), but Al-Canada is plain nuts and Britain is a Multicultural banana republic. Australia and New Zealand could be a part of Greater China by mid-century. Maybe they will be more prosperous as a part of Greater China than France will be as a part of Greater Algeria or the United States as a part of Greater Mexico. But they will be Asians, not Westerners.

As I’ve documented in my book Defeating Eurabia, this is a planned destruction of all European and indeed Western nation states through Multiculturalism and transnational organizations such as the EU. There is nothing accidental about this. We need to support, as a matter of principle, all European patriots who fight for their country and their dignity, provided that they do not champion totalitarian ideologies. We’re all in the same boat.

I will support the Vlaams Belang first of all because they deserve it, and second of all because other Westerners should show solidarity with those who fight for their sovereignty. The VB are attacked because the Eurabian elites fear that they constitute a threat to their power both nationally and transnationally, and they’re right. Which is exactly why native Europeans should support them. Splitting Belgium, the institutional and geographical heart of the European Union, will create cracks in the EU itself.

The EU is currently the planet’s most evil organization, an institutionalized attack on the very existence of the native peoples of an entire continent, the most influential and creative civilization in human history. The EU is an organized crime against humanity, and we should support absolutely everything that can undermine the EU as well as Globalism and Multiculturalism throughout the Western world.

That’s why I hate Belgium, which has one of the sickest and most evil political elites in the Western world, and love the Vlaams Belang.

Social Democrats Turn Out for the Terrorists

Social Democrats Turn Out for the Terrorists

by Baron Bodissey

Kalmar Demo
One of our Swedish readers wrote us this morning with news of yet another pro-Palestinian demonstration:

Kalmar DemoIn the small town of Kalmar, on the southeastern coast of New Sweden, there was a demonstration on Saturday in support of Hamas and associates, and of course for lasting peace in the Middle East.

Demonstrators with the right flags arrived in Mercedes cars, along with the valued representative for the local Social Democrats, Mr. Nasim Malik (also called the Ham Sandwich, because he in his agony turned to the Discrimination Ombudsman for damages when he was offered such a sandwich by SAS on a flight to Stockholm).

Kalmar DemoThere are nice photos at Thoralf Alfsson’s blog — have fun!

The assertion that certain demonstrators were hiding their faces, was an utter lie — it was so bloody cold that day, you must know…

See this Swedish radio report.

Kalmar DemoThe keffiyeh and Hizbullah flags were much in evidence at the event.

That’s Nasim Malik on the right, with an unidentified New Swede at the microphone.

Another Swedish contact sent information about some of the grandees of Swedish background who took part in the Kalmar demonstration:
- – - - – - – - -

Among those attending were:

Kalmar DemoSocialdemokraternas kommunfullmäktigeordförande i Kalmar, Roger Kaliff: The district board chairman of the Social Democrats. The Social Democrats (Socialdemokraterna) are the ruling party, so Roger Kaliff has a lot of power.

Vänsterpartiets kommunalråd Bertil Dahl: The district council leader for the Left Party (formerly the Communists).

Martin Andersson, the Ombudsman for the SSU, the youth organization for Socialdemokraterna.

The guy in the wheelchair led the crowd in chants of “No peace with Israel”.

See Thoralf Alfsson’s post for more photos, and for larger versions of the photos shown here. If you read Swedish, you’ll probably find more juicy details there about the lefty fans of Hamas who showed up for the festivities in Kalmar.

Geert Wilders to be Prosecuted for “Hate Speech”

Geert Wilders to be Prosecuted for “Hate Speech”

by Baron Bodissey

Geert WildersIf any one person personifies the resistance against the Islamization of Europe, that person is Geert Wilders. His message is simple, honest, and straightforward: the people of the Netherlands (and other nations) have a right to protect the traditional character of their native countries and demand a halt to mass immigration.

But the forces of Multiculturalism are arrayed against him. The Powers That Be recognize how dangerous he is, and are determined to stop him.

And at last they have found a means to do so, all the while being covered by a fig leaf of legality. According to the BBC:

Islam film Dutch MP to be charged

A Dutch court has ordered prosecutors to put a right-wing politician on trial for making anti-Islamic statements.

Freedom Party leader Geert Wilders made a controversial film last year equating Islam with violence and has likened the Koran to Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf.

“In a democratic system, hate speech is considered so serious that it is in the general interest to… draw a clear line,” the court in Amsterdam said.

Mr Wilders said the judgement was an “attack on the freedom of expression”.

“Participation in the public debate has become a dangerous activity. If you give your opinion, you risk being prosecuted,” he said.

Not only he, but all Dutch citizens opposed to the “Islamisation” of their country would be on trial, Mr Wilders warned.

“Who will stand up for our culture if I am silenced?” he added.

‘Incitement’

The three judges said that they had weighed Mr Wilders’s “one-sided generalisations” against his right to free speech, and ruled that he had gone beyond the normal leeway granted to politicians.

Notice that the court claims the right to grant “normal leeway” to politicians. That is, they are the law. The political leaders, who are elected by the people and are charged with passing laws, do so only on the sufferance of judges, who make the ultimate decisions about what is and isn’t permitted.
- – - - – - – - -

“The Amsterdam appeals court has ordered the prosecution of member of parliament Geert Wilders for inciting hatred and discrimination, based on comments by him in various media on Muslims and their beliefs,” the court said in a statement.

“The court also considers appropriate criminal prosecution for insulting Muslim worshippers because of comparisons between Islam and Nazism made by Wilders,” it added.

The court’s ruling reverses a decision last year by the public prosecutor’s office, which said Mr Wilders’s comments had been made outside parliament as a contribution to the debate on Islam in Dutch society and that no criminal offence had been committed.

And the prosecutors have no choice. The judge has ruled, and they must prosecute:

Prosecutors said on Wednesday that they could not appeal against the judgement and would open an investigation immediately.

Gerard Spong, a prominent lawyer who pushed for Mr Wilders’s prosecution, welcomed the court’s decision.

“This is a happy day for all followers of Islam who do not want to be tossed on the garbage dump of Nazism,” he told reporters.

Why Do Blacks Hate Dubya?

Why Do Blacks Hate Dubya?

Locust: Because he is White?

By Steve Sailer

George W. Bush’s strenuous efforts at “minority outreach” were rewarded by the lowest fraction of the black vote since Barry Goldwater. Depending on which exit poll you consult, Dubya carried between 8% and 10% of African-American voters. Since Election Day, the Democrats and the press have gleefully been asking Republicans: “How are you going to stop doing so shamefully badly among blacks?” For them, it’s as much fun as asking: “Have you stopped beating your wife?”

Strikingly, Republicans seem to agree that there is something illegitimate about their victories unless a larger fraction of the “black community” gives its blessing. Consider the January 10th Wall Street Journal column hyping the Martin Luther King Day wingding at the Heritage Institute on “How the new administration can reach out to black America.” Gerald F. Seib gave a revealing example of what he sees as the GOP’s need to win more black votes:

“In three states — Alabama, Georgia and Louisiana — more than half of Al Gore’s total votes came from blacks. Yet he lost all three because the white vote went heavily for Mr. Bush.”

Hmmhmmh … Maybe I’m missing something, Mr. Seib, but wouldn’t the Republican sweep of those three states be a problem for Democrats, not Republicans?

Republicans have been furiously scratching their heads over how to draw more black votes. For example, when I started reading the Free Republic responses to my VDARE article (GOP Future Depends on Winning Larger Share of the White Vote), I presumed that many of the attacks on my thesis would center on the alleged inevitability of immigration population. Yet, most respondents seemed bored with thinking about immigrants. What everybody wanted to talk about was why blacks didn’t vote Republican.

· First thing to remember: despite all the moral glamour that our society invests in “civil rights leaders” like Jesse Jackson, African-Americans are neither a fast-growing group nor even a terribly large one. No pundit should be allowed to expound on election strategy without first proving he knows the answer to this simple question:

Q. Which would have increased Bush’s popular vote total more?

1. Tripling his share of the black vote from 10% to 30%.

2. Increasing his share of the white vote from 54% to merely 57%.

A. #2. This seemingly tiny gain among whites would have done Bush more good. Because African-Americans make up 10% of voters, tripling his share would have netted him 2.0 percentage points more votes. In contrast, whites cast 81% of the vote, so 3% of 81% would represent 2.43 percentage points more votes.

· Second thing to remember: blacks have perfectly good reasons for voting Democratic. Republicans seem to assume that they could get their laissez-faire messages across to blacks if they just keep repeating it very loudly and slowly. The funniest example of this came from Seib’s column. In it, he endorses a black Republican who suggested that “working-class minorities are deeply concerned about building retirement savings and passing on assets to their children, meaning that Bush appeals to eliminate the estate tax and reform Social Security should resonate with them.”

“Eliminate the estate tax”?

Double Hmmhmmh …So, Mr. Seib, why exactly didn’t Dubya’s plan to eliminate the inheritance tax “resonate” with blacks on Nov. 7? Could it possibly be that African-Americans, on average, have a rational reason for voting for Democrats who want to keep the inheritance tax? Is it possible that on average blacks tend to have slightly smaller estates than the subscribers to The Wall Street Journal?

· Third thing to remember: even though the reasons most blacks don’t vote Republican are perfectly obvious, it is definitely worth investigating in detail why Dubya did worse than his GOP predecessors.

Republicans can’t understand why this happened. After all, didn’t Dubya outreach to minorities like crazy? For example,

o Didn’t Dubya speak Spanish all the time?

o Didn’t he boast about how many Mexican-American votes he got in Texas?

o Didn’t he talk about how “family values don’t stop at the Rio Grande”?

o Didn’t he send his half-Mexican nephew George P. Bush out to campaign for him?

o Didn’t “P” tell a Spanish-speaking audience at the Republican convention about how his Mexican-born mother, the wife of Florida Governor Jeb Bush, instilled in him the values of Cesar Chavez and “told me we have to fight for our race …”

“Gosh,” Republicans keep asking themselves, “How come African-Americans didn’t appreciate all these pro-minority gestures?”

Well … because African-Americans aren’t Mexicans. They aren’t Central Americans. They aren’t Cubans. And they sure aren’t immigrants.

Blacks and Hispanics have radically different interests. Immigrants drive blacks out of blue-collar jobs and drive down wages in general. They are shoving blacks from political power across Southern California. Amusingly, Democratic Congressgorgon Maxine Waters now represents a district that has a Hispanic majority. African-Americans have been fleeing L.A. and Cuban-run Miami for black-run Atlanta.

Riots provide an acid test of assumptions about minority solidarity.

Ø Miami’s African-Americans repeatedly rioted against the city’s Hispanic-dominated police force during the Eighties.

Ø The 1991 riot in Washington D.C.’s Mt. Pleasant district began when drunken Salvadoran men resisted the dishonor of being arrested by a black woman police officer. Although the immigrants began the rioting, African-American youth quickly poured into the neighborhood and looted immigrant stores. Mayor Marion Barry’s black-run police force showed up, but largely sat in their cruisers, enjoying the spectacle of black kids destroying a Hispanic neighborhood.

Ø During the L.A. riot of 1992, Mexican criminal gangs patrolled the streets of East L.A. to prevent black rioters from looting their neighborhood.

Dubya chose first and foremost to pander to Hispanics, not blacks. In turn, African-Americans punished him for being biased toward their rivals. In the states where Dubya’s Hispanic strategy worked best — Florida and Texas — his share of the black vote was abysmal. Here are the data from the Voter News Service exit polls:

Ø Dubya won 49% of the Hispanic vote (and 57% of the white vote) in Jeb’s Florida, but a crummy 7% of the black vote.

Ø Less publicized is the remarkable fact that in Dubya’s home state of Texas — where he pulled in 43% of the Hispanic vote (and a tremendous 73% of the white vote) — Dubya garnered a truly stinking 5% from blacks.

It’s instructive to compare conservative Texas to liberal California. There, according to local media legends, former Republican governor Pete Wilson conducted human sacrifices of illegal aliens or something like that. In the Golden State, Dubya took only 29% of the Hispanic vote (and a lousy 48% of the white vote). Yet, he did more than twice as well among blacks (11%) as in his home state.

In other words, in Texas, where the Republican Party is reputed to be pro-Mexican, Dubya did only about 1/15th as well among blacks as among whites. But in California, where the GOP has a reputation as anti-Mexican, Dubya did almost a whole 1/4th as well among blacks as among whites.

So, here’s the Republican dilemma regarding minorities:

· The only clear way for Republicans to do better with African-Americans is to campaign against Hispanic immigration.

· Dubya ran an almost state-of-the-art campaign of multiculturalist identity politics campaign aimed at Hispanics. Yet, he still did worse among Hispanics by pandering to them than Ronald Reagan did by talking to them about patriotism. Dubya’s mediocre showing with Hispanics in Texas is just about all the GOP has to show for their minority outreach program.

Perhaps Mexican-Americans in the rest of the country will come to tolerate President Dubya to the same degree as those in Texas got along with Governor Dubya.

On the other hand, it’s possible that Texas’ Mexican-Americans differ culturally and even racially from California’s Mexican-Americans. The Texans tend to be from the same Northeastern Mexico culture that provides the main constituency of Vincente Fox’s GOP-like PAN party. In contrast, California’s immigrants increasingly come from the center of Mexico, where the corrupt PRI and the leftist PRD dominate, and the far South, where Subcommandante Marcos’ Marxist guerillas control part of Chiapas.

Mexican immigrants are increasingly coming from the impoverished South. So the future for the GOP looks bleak.

As we’ve seen since Nov. 7, the Republicans have gained next to no kudos from winning 35% of the Hispanic vote. And winning it cost them a sizable fraction of even the few black votes they’d normally get. In America’s game of moral one-upmanship, Hispanic support is far less sexy than black support. (Although it’s more glamorous than Asian support.) For better or worse, African-Americans remain lodged in the public imagination as America’s “real minority.”

In short, Dubya’s “diversity” strategy has proven to be – at best – a zero sum game.

Mandela’s Example For Obama

Mandela’s Example For Obama

By Martin Kelly

As immigrationist propaganda goes, W. M. Spellman’s The Global Community is certainly sincere.

First published in 2002, it was reviewed in all the right places; yet now you can buy it on Amazon for a penny. Spellman, sometime Professor of Humanities at the University of North Carolina Asheville, digs very deep into the history of human migration. If the author hadn’t packed and peppered his book with the cliches of diversity, it would be a scholarly work of considerable merit.

It’s full of interesting factoids. The Japanese word sakkoku” means keeping the country closed. Chinese migrants to California in the 19th Century labelled San Francisco “Jinshan”; “the mountain of gold”. In some respects, the similarity between indentured servants, no doubt the ancestors of many VDare.com readers, and beneficiaries of the H-1B visa scheme is quite striking, although there are major differences; the indentured servants worked for fixed periods, they didn’t displace anyone else and they weren’t encouraged to bring their families along for the ride.

Yet the book’s most interesting aspect is its insight into possibly the thorniest aspect of what is now every major country’s “National Question”; the removal of illegal aliens.

On June 30, 1964, National Review wrote of Nelson Mandela’s conviction that [t] he South African courts have sentenced a batch of admitted terrorists to life in the penitentiary, and you would think the court had just finished barbecuing St. Joan, to hear the howls from the liberal press.”[Oh, Shut Up, By William F Buckley, PDF]

Of course, much has changed at National Review since then—and once in office, Mandela would prove himself to have no truck with Open Borders. His track record proves he sat firmly on the muscular wing of restrictionist thought.

On Page 177, Spellman writes:

“Even post-apartheid South Africa has wrestled, in large measure unsuccessfully, with the problem of unwanted labor migrants. The white minority government had vigorously expelled undocumented residents during its long ascendancy; in 1993 alone some 50,000 migrant workers were required to leave the country. But in the first year of democratic majority rule, Nelson Mandela’s government expelled almost 60,000 undocumented migrants, most of whom were from neighbouring Mozambique. The primacy of the nation-state ideal remains secure even in areas of the world where the detrimental influence of Western colonialism had its greatest impact” [yadda, yadda, yadda...]

Even Mandela’s subsequent marriage to Graca Machel, the widow of Mozambique’s former president, did not give a free pass to Mozambicans living in South Africa. According to Human Rights Watch (scroll to page 2), the South African police have been known to arrest people for “walking like a Mozambican”. Not even the most hysterical critics of immigration enforcement could reasonably suggest that such abuses of power would be tolerated in the English-speaking West.

Yet it is perfectly reasonable for South Africa to be concerned about the negative impact of immigration—in 2001, Mangosuthu Buthelezi, possibly the only immigration minister to have acted in a movie alongside Michael Caine, told the South African Parliament that the “presence of illegal aliens impacts on housing, health services, education, crime, drugs, transmittable diseases — need I go on?”

South Africa has shown that a country determined to put its own citizens’ interests first will deport illegal aliens in numbers. Yet its example is ignored by those who say “it can’t be done”. The answer is: “Yes it can”. It can even be done creatively.

What the South African government has been seen to possess is the political will to take simple, not easy, measures—a will which the American and British governments lack. It is not an issue of administrative competence; it is a matter of guts and spirit. The South Africans have shown that in some respects, they’ve got it and our leaders don’t.

Instead, our own leaders’ unmandated adoption of foggy, soggy, unhistorical, anti-Western, “One World” policies rooted in ideological nonsense has rotted their capacity to analyse the almost ludicrously simple problem in front of them.

Many are so addled that they probably either like what they see, or just don’t care.

I believe that some liberals really do think that the USA is as desperate and corrupt as many countries in the Third World, and therefore view Barack Obama as the charismatic leader of a Third World liberation movement.

Only history will show us whether Obama himself believes it. Immigration enforcement is an area of policy in which a Third World country has shown itself to be streets ahead of the two greatest nation-states in the First.

If Barack Obama’s ego is big enough to make him want to be compared to Nelson Mandela, then his first task in office should be to order the root and branch reform of a broken immigration system, including systematic deportation of those caught in the USA in violation of its immigration laws.

If his record shows nothing else, at least in the area of immigration policy, Mandela proved himself to be a patriot.

Immigration reform patriots are allowed to hope too, aren’t they?

Western Muslims Refuse to Fight other Muslims

Muslims Refuse to Fight

More news stories on France

Le Figaro, January 14, 2009

Several Muslim soldiers refused to fight in Afghanistan, citing their faith, according to the blog release “Secret Defense, confirmed by the Army.

These are young Muslims who did not want to fight other Muslims in Afghanistan, “wrote Liberation journalist Jean-Dominique Merchet on his blog.

“”The refusal to go on a mission for reasons faith is a micro-phenomenon that involves less than five cases a year,” said Colonel Benoit Royal, head of Information and Public Relations of the Army (SIRPA -Earth), questioned by AFP.

It reflects in his view, “beyond the reason given by the soldiers, an error of understanding of the meaning of their commitment to bear arms of France to defend its interests and values at all times and in all places”.

Also according to the Royal Colonel, “a disciplinary procedure is systematically engaged in case of refusal to go into operation, resulting in most cases to termination of contract”.

Libération’s blog states that a case was reported last October in the 1st Infantry Regiment Sarrebourg (Moselle). The soldier is, however, reversed his decision after having met a Muslim army chaplain.

Fell ill while he was to leave the stage of preparation, the soldier will only be sent by Afghanistan as planned next month, also confirmed by Colonel Royal.

The number of French soldiers of the Muslim faith is unknown, said “Secret Defense”, the French law prohibiting recognition of religion.

Translation from original article.

Original article

(Posted on January 20, 2009)


Comments

“The number of French soldiers of the Muslim faith is unknown, said “Secret Defense”, the French law prohibiting recognition of religion.”

There is now approximatively 30% to 40% soldiers of non-european origins in the french army.

So I can guess around 25% of soldiers are muslims.

Posted by Anonymous at 7:15 PM on January 20


I want to say something good about France, but I can’t ethically do it. What a disgrace they are except for Bridget Bardot. Charles Martel is rolling over in his grave.

Posted by Howard at 7:15 PM on January 20


It is the Soldier, not the minister
Who has given us freedom of religion.
It is the Soldier, not the reporter
Who has given us freedom of the press.
It is the Soldier, not the poet
Who has given us freedom of speech.
It is the Soldier, not the campus organizer
Who has given us freedom to protest.
It is the Soldier, not the lawyer
Who has given us the right to a fair trial.
It is the Soldier, not the politician
Who has given us the right to vote.
It is the Soldier who salutes the flag,
Who serves beneath the flag,
And whose coffin is draped by the flag,
Who allows the protester to burn the flag.”

“An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide”
Arnold Joseph Toynbee

Our once great Nations are now simply countries.
Global citizens.

Posted by GenX in Oz at 7:18 PM on January 20


Good for them not to fight other Middle Easterners. I will never fight other White men. When the Brits and Germans throw off their chains and the U.S. government
demands we fight them..I will not. WWI and WWII were disasters for white people. Never again should we fight each other.

Posted by quinn at 7:21 PM on January 20


Ah, yes, another strength of diversity.

You know, if I keep reading stories like this so much I just might get the impression that diversity isn’t anybody’s strength.

Then it will be time to take me to the re-education camps to make certain my mind is right, so I can see clearly,

Posted by q at 7:53 PM on January 20


same thing happend to soviet union in Afghanistan. Muslim soldiers from various soviet republics refused to fight which contributed to the evantual soviet withdraw from there.

Posted by john at 8:17 PM on January 20


I wonder how many military officers in the West recognize that the countries they are sworn to defend are disappearing? I’m certain that they are well-informed about the abilities of their diverse troops, because armies are the largest systematic compilers of aptitude tests. I’m equally certain that they would know better than to say what they know if they expect to stay in the ranks. But who’s side are they really on?

Posted by Schoolteacher at 8:58 PM on January 20


I bet a thousand bucks they would fight the white French soldiers though….if they won’t fight, send them out of the country, they are traitors to the land that feeds them!!!

Posted by tomcat at 9:58 PM on January 20


Ain’t diversity grand?

Posted by Frank at 10:06 PM on January 20


And were the Muzzies executed? No. So much for French military disipline as displayed in the movie “Paths of Glory.” Islamics are religionists FIRST, and nothing after. Muzzies were portrayd as courageous in a recent French film, “Days of Glory,” but obviously the new breed of Islamics intends to “take out” the West.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0444182/

Posted by Anonymous at 10:38 PM on January 20


Cassius clay(muhamad ali)refused to go into us army for the same reason.He got away with it…

Posted by crazyhorse at 10:48 PM on January 20


Muslims may be the one group that has been getting the most annoying and rediculous. All they do is demand equal rights and catering to their population, all the while MUSLIM terrorist groups cause mass destruction and death all around the world. They aren’t just a burden to whites, but also to all non-muslims on the planet.

And the fact that people actually are willing to give in to their demands is even more horrifying and disgusting.

Posted by Ameri-swede at 11:00 PM on January 20


In that case, let them stay in Afghanistan and refuse their re-entry into France.

Posted by factualist at 11:45 PM on January 20


Every Muslim is required to fight jihad against the West or he is non-compliant with his religion. France is being unreasonable to expect anything less.

Posted by Anonymous at 1:11 AM on January 21


http://thetrumpet.com/index.php?q=3135.0.90.0

Posted by Commando at 6:19 AM on January 21


French government, this should show you where their
loyalties lie. So much for them graciuosly repaying
you, while you bend over backwards to meet their
every need. But I suppose Sarkozy is terrified that
if he forces them to fight. Cars will be set ablaze
and riots will break out all over France. The
“enrichment” and “strength” of diversity is on
display yet again.

Posted by Dr. Caligari at 10:44 AM on January 21


same thing happend to soviet union in Afghanistan. Muslim soldiers from various soviet republics refused to fight which contributed to the evantual soviet withdraw from there.

I have witnessed no reluctance to fight other muslims by muslims in 5 years in the middle east war, to include Afghan, Iraq and Kuwait. They seem most willing to do the most atrocious things to each other and I have photos to prove it. They are also willing to do these same things to other religions and nationalities also.

Posted by SKIP at 12:23 PM on January 21

I’ve Never Lived With a White Man, But Racism Is Still There in My DNA

I’ve Never Lived With a White Man, But Racism Is Still

There in My DNA

More news stories on Racial Suicide

Daily Mail (London), January 19, 2009

Today I am going to reveal something I have never written about before (and you thought there were no more guts to spill).

Here we go. I’ve never had a relationship with a white man. I’ve never had sex with a white man, although I have kissed the odd one, many years ago.

I have been thinking about this fact over the past week, as the issue of race has reared its head again.

On the one hand, we’re about to have a black family in the White House. On the other, we learn our future King refers to a close friend, who is Asian, as ‘Sooty’, while his son, Harry, was caught a few years ago referring to a fellow soldier as a ‘Paki’.

There has been a lot of talk over the past few days, defending the Royals, saying that of course Harry is a hero not a bigot, that Charles is merely being affectionate, and has probably been called Jug Ears in his time.

That America can no longer be racist. That everything is OK.

But racism is more complicated than that. America’s acceptance of Barack Obama is similar to its love for Will Smith: both have to behave white and be devilishly (wrong word) attractive.

Paki does not equate with calling someone ginger; only if people with ginger hair have been attacked in race riots, barred from renting property, beaten up in school and not given jobs because of the colour of their hair, eyebrows and eyelashes, would it somehow be on a par.

Why am I bringing up the fact I have had relationships only with black and Asian men?

It is not to bleat that, having been on the arm of a man of colour, I have experienced racism first-hand.

I haven’t, bar the odd occasion when my boyfriend was assumed to be my minicab driver.

Unless you are black or Asian you cannot know what racism feels like.

I’m not even going to say how terrible inverse racism is: you know, poor white people being disliked, being all brave dating a black man (a viewpoint as hopelessly dated as the film Guess Who’s Coming To Dinner?).

Dating, and even marrying, these men meant I was treated only with courtesy by their friends and families, which was very different indeed to how my dad treated my first boyfriend.

I tried to understand that my dad had been in combat with the Mau Mau in Kenya in the Fifties; but, although he was friendly with Germans despite having fought them in Italy, he never could quite get over his distrust of black people.

He refused to let my boyfriend in the house, and ostracised me for a bit; similarly, he always thought my brother’s black wife was lazy and disorganised and ‘too laid-back’.

I want to illustrate that racism is still there and, with the current pressure on jobs and housing and the environment, is a pot of boiling resentment that is in danger of splashing our shiny PC worktops.

We haven’t stamped it out, we have merely buried it.

I saw Cheryl Cole on TV a couple of weeks ago. She is a woman who got into a fight with a black lavatory attendant, married a (rich, Caucasian-featured) black man, and was seen, eyes widening like a cat with a mouse, ogling a mixed-race young man auditioning for The X Factor.

Does this make her incredibly open-minded, or the possessor of a (racist, colonialist) fetish for dark skin?

I think in the Nineties I fell in love with three black men partly because it was fashionable and gave me a veneer of (here comes a racist word) ‘cool’ that, as a boring Essex girl, I didn’t possess.

I married, on the wave of Asians being the new blacks, with lots of hot new books in the bestseller lists, an Indian (that wasn’t the whole reason but, let’s be honest here, it was part of it).

But even this ‘love’ of someone from another culture didn’t stop me, the other day, when a young, black friend told me she had been given a council house but wasn’t happy because ‘it doesn’t have central heating’, from thinking: ‘How bloody ungrateful. Why are you always cold? My brother has to pay his daughter’s rent, all of it.’

White people, no matter how many community projects we might fund or months we might serve fighting for a foreign cause, are capable of racist thoughts and actions that need to be stamped on, hard.

Boris Johnson’s part-Asian wife is often wheeled out to defend his offensive statements, but his marriage doesn’t make him whiter than white. Bad analogy, but you know what I mean.

Racism can be in our DNA. We need to examine ourselves more deeply, not merely slick over the resentments with social niceties.

Original article

(Posted on January 20, 2009)


Comments

If a race realist/White Nationalist looked up “enemy” in the dictionary there would be a picture of this woman. Words can’t describe her hatred for White men. I truly believe people like her would send White men to death camps if possible. It’s not crazy to call this woman evil. The race of men that gave their women rights to vote, read and get jobs is now reduced to reading articles humiliating us by the very women we treat as equals. I hate reading stories like this because every time I look at a White woman I wonder if she feels the same as Liz Jones.

Posted by Howard at 6:56 PM on January 20


Couldn’t get through this one. Unreadable.

Posted by Anonymous at 6:57 PM on January 20


One wonders how a person could hate herself and her race so much. The only thing about this woman and her story that I found positive is that there is zero chance that she will bear white children. Once she is gone there will be nothing in the white gene pool to indicate she was ever here. Any children she has or will have will be non white. Can you just imagine how she would treat her child if it had a white father?

Posted by Mike Harrigan at 7:12 PM on January 20


Yes she is a racist… a racist against her own people.

Posted by Anonymous at 7:16 PM on January 20


“I think in the Nineties I fell in love with three black men partly because it was fashionable and gave me a veneer of (here comes a racist word) ‘cool’ that, as a boring Essex girl, I didn’t possess.”

“I married, on the wave of Asians being the new blacks, with lots of hot new books in the bestseller lists, an Indian (that wasn’t the whole reason but, let’s be honest here, it was part of it).”

These two sentences say it all about this vile, disgusting woman. Admitting that you practiced miscegenation because it was “cool” or “fashionable” is like bragging that you flunked out of high school. Why would anyone listen to someone so hopelessly dim, shallow and self-centered?

Posted by idareya at 7:20 PM on January 20


Having a look at the reader comments in the original article, it’s interesting how hostile the vast majority are to this imbecile.

Posted by Dougie (Edinburgh) at 7:20 PM on January 20


“Liz Jones (born 1958 or before) is an English journalist and writer. She is currently the fashion editor for the Daily Mail. Previously to this she was the editor of British Marie Claire. She is a former anorexic [1] and suffers from obsessive-compulsive disorder[2].”

That pretty much says enough, doesn’t it?

Read her OTHER article: “Liz Jones: I’m finally, finally, finally divorcing my husband”. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-456237/Liz-Jones-Im-finally-finally-finally-divorcing-husband.html
Once you read it, you TOO will realize WHY “Mr. Liz Jones” (14 years younger than Liz) got out of that situation.

You’re over 40, Liz. Your husband cheated on you several times, while he lived off your income. You have no kids, and probably never will.
To top things off, no self respecting white man will waste his time on you.
Be proud of that large paycheck, because that’s all you have.

Posted by D.B. Cooper at 7:22 PM on January 20


Who was the deranged marxist that wrote this article? She needs serious psycological help! Perhaps this way of thinking is the direct result of the infiltration of western educational institutions by the Frankfurt school.

Posted by Stephen Douglas at 7:48 PM on January 20


Another exhibitionist white woman who pretends to self-flagellate over “racism” so that she can parade all her dark swains in front of the reader and call attention to herself as “desirable.” If she declaims that she wouldn’t have a white man, maybe the real story is that no white man would have her.

Posted by Zorba_the_Geek at 7:50 PM on January 20


Children who spend their lives trying to spite their parents make poor decisions.

Liz Jones can either confront the unresolved conflict, or continue to be immature and write self-serving articles like this.

Posted by Anonymous at 8:08 PM on January 20


This is a good example of white guilt. Nothing more.

Posted by Memphomaniac at 8:40 PM on January 20


“Unless you are black or Asian you cannot know what racism feels like.”

What ignorance! I am white, worked for a racist black, and YES I know what racism/prejudice is. Blacks and Asians dish it out as much as they complain about it.

Posted by GetBackJack at 8:40 PM on January 20


There is a mental pathology in people like this who cannot see the racism in non-Whites and are brainwashed – willingly in this case, agains their own kind. Gingers!? I know many redheads who suffered and were made to feel humiliated every time their hair color was mentioned. The first thing many do is find the darkest person they can to make children with – so redheads, once plentiful in Northern Europe will soon be extinct. And this dumb woman has the audacity to negate this social genocide. There is a sad end for Whites like her who will in her old age, look at her family photos and realize that none of her grandchildren look like her, or anyone of her ancestors. But it will be too late then.

Posted by Whiteplight at 8:52 PM on January 20


I suspect her life is as disorganised and confused as her writing style.

Posted by The Caucasian at 8:56 PM on January 20


This woman should be in therapy not writing articles for the British press.

This is another example of my supposition that liberalism is a kind of mental illness. A healthy mind does not need to contort logic, reason, and self-evident reality to conform to it’s self-created fantasy. A healthy mind doesn’t work this way.

Posted by sbuffalonative at 9:17 PM on January 20


“Unless you are black or Asian you cannot know what racism feels like.”

And unless you’re white you cannot know what it feels like to be continually blamed for people’s failure to learn to read, hold a job or pay for your own kids.

Posted by Tripoli at 9:22 PM on January 20


The Daily Mail today had an article about black squirrels in the east of England.

They are more competitive than the existing gray squirrels. Both the blacks and grays are native to America. The blacks were taking territory from the grays.

The grays had previously forced out the red squirrels, which in turn are native to England.

Just an example of racism in nature. Competition between and of the fittest.

And no, after marriage to three black guys, Liz, you can forget about white guys. You must really hate your father.

Posted by Harvey at 9:24 PM on January 20


Oh, my, my, another stupid, white-hating, white woman. Does it ever occur to anyone why do we not hear about this racial self-hatred from black, asian, or middle-eastern women??? I suppose that the mainstream media and government anti-white propaganda is most effective on women who, for some reason, are more influenced by the tube than men are.

In my nice, professional, neighborhood, some white women who are happily married to white men voted for Obama even though their husbands voted for McCain. When my conservative wife asked them why would they vote for a man who would push for affirmative action that would hurt their white family’s interests they became emotional and could not answer the question.

I would venture to guess that women voted more conservative before the broadcast media, especially television, came on the scene. Of course, enough young white men are now buying into this anti-white nonsense as well. The woman who wrote this article probably adores the “telly” and lives in a self-imposed “Fahrenheit 451” type existence along with most of her friends.

Posted by Anonymous at 9:34 PM on January 20


“I think in the Nineties I fell in love with three black men partly because it was fashionable and gave me a veneer of (here comes a racist word) ‘cool’ that, as a boring Essex girl, I didn’t possess.”

How disgusting and shallow. Imagine rearing a child that turns out like this.

I cannot begin to fathom the degree of self-loathing that this woman endures, much less the hatred she holds for her family.

Please, for the love of God, if you feel the way this woman feels, move to the African bush and live your life with the objects of your senseless existence.

That will never happen, of course, because the real thrill such people receive is derived from engaging in behavior that is perceived as shocking or scandalous.

Posted by Anonymous at 9:35 PM on January 20


Unless you are black or Asian you cannot know what racism feels like.

Right, tell that to the whites being killed in Zimbabwe and displaced all because they’re white. Tell that to whites who get beaten up and killed in a black neighborhood simply because they’re white. Such smug, condescending liberal arrogance. What else is new?

Posted by Anonymous at 9:56 PM on January 20


White people, no matter how many community projects we might fund or months we might serve fighting for a foreign cause, are capable of racist thoughts and actions that need to be stamped on, hard.

This person’s statement in itself is racist. Every ethnic and racial group on this planet is prejudice or uncomfortable when there are people around them who don’t look like them. Since racism is in our DNA, I guess there’s no point “stamping it out”, huh? I guess there’s no point for whites to continually apologize and give up our money and children and culture (and daughters) for attonement, right?

Posted by Anonymous at 10:00 PM on January 20


This woman is the epitome of self-obsession.

And a heads up to her, grovelling is NEVER cool

She is an embarassment to all involved

Posted by Anonymous at 10:41 PM on January 20


So now we White males know how imperfect we are compared to non-White males who stand next to gods – absent of any sense of race. We learn this from a woman who admits her total alienation from White males long ago before she even discovered she was a despicable White. One good thing to be said of her is that she does believe that race is real which shows itself through the ranting about “racism”. Therefore she must believe that populations of people can be classified as different groups or races, even if as she believes that white males are inferior.

Posted by factualist at 11:38 PM on January 20


Is this a joke? Or a university prank?
NO! It’s from the ‘London Daily Mail’!!!
I believe I can finally say that this really is the most stupid article I have ever read in my life, and I’m 39 years old. Got a few decades left…
Nothing can top this one.
I cannot recall reading an article even half-way as ridiculous as this one in the papers here in Australia.
Look out England…

Posted by Anonymous at 11:56 PM on January 20


This, again, just goes to show that for some people, “racism” isn’t beaten until Whites are utterly and completely subservient, apologetic, and sorry for their past, present, and future. Let us hope that people of this opinion are a shrinking minority of their own.

Posted by David at 12:35 AM on January 21


WOW! What a complete and utter headcase this woman is. “Only blacks and Asians know what racism feels like”. Oh really? How little of the world this foolish woman knows. Wasn’t it BLACKS who drove ASIANS out of the sub-Saharan African countries? And where did all these ‘poor’ Asians go? Back to their own homelands? Not a chance! They piled into “racist” Britain. What a pathetic headcase this woman is.

Posted by Anonymous at 1:44 AM on January 21


“I’ve never had a relationship with a white man. I’ve never had sex with a white man, although I have kissed the odd one, many years ago.”

She’s white, lives in a white majority country, and none of her encounters has been with a white man? If that isn’t an implicit admission of anti-white racism, I don’t know what is.

“I think in the Nineties I fell in love with three black men partly because it was fashionable and gave me a veneer of (here comes a racist word) ‘cool’ that, as a boring Essex girl, I didn’t possess.

I married, on the wave of Asians being the new blacks, with lots of hot new books in the bestseller lists, an Indian (that wasn’t the whole reason but, let’s be honest here, it was part of it).”

Asian is the new black? I’ve anecdotally observed the boyfriend-as-fashion-accessory phenomenon before, but this is the first time I’ve seen an explicit admission of such.

Posted by Anonymous at 1:50 AM on January 21


All I can honestly say about these people is that they are deficient in some way. Not because they go with other races, but because of their hounding of white men. I have had friends and even some girlfriends who weren’t white and they have never hounded me for my views, even when it was some observation that I had that was unfavorable to their race/culture. The Liz Joneses’ of the world are a scourge, a pestilence to whites. No other race I know of has people in it that habitually try to denigrate those like themselves. To live vs. to exist, is to be free, not forced into someone else’s modes of thinking. Mrs. Jones is a victim of mental deficiency of some type,or brainwashing, or something else, but definetly not a victim of her DNA.

Posted by Bobby at 1:53 AM on January 21


Two thoughts come to mind:
1-Ms. Jones attitude toward White men is similar to Prez. Obama’s mama’s: If he’s not White; he’s all right.

2-With women like Ms. Jones infesting the Western world, if I were under 40, I would become accept Islam. That and homosexuality seem to be the only ways a White man can gain some much needed immunity to Feminism.

Posted by Anonymous at 4:32 AM on January 21


This woman, from her writing must be a white woman and her reference to “Essex girl” in the UK means that she is most likely a hard-drinking (drunk abd literally rolling in the streets at weekends)swearing, the UK equivalent of a US redneck, definitely the kind if girl you do not bring home to meet your parents. Perhaps that is why she castigates decent white men, because they reject her. So sad that there are too many in te Uk (and the US?) who are, like her, really the racist ones for she, by her own pen, demonstrates this fact. She calls all white men as uncool or to be avoided (how racist can you get?), as coloureds of any other race just have to be better. May she end up as many such women do in the UK as well as in the US, left with five kids, on her own, deserted by one of her cool partners (not husband.)

At least the Christian religion stopped a lot of this foolishness and set up decent standards for us all.

Posted by B J Deller at 4:53 AM on January 21


Hullo to all my friends in the USA, and welcome to the world of the British media. We in the old country have to live on a daily diet of ‘racist’ propaganda. Every day, every week, every year, 24/7 RACISM is the topic. Phone-ins, radio debate, newspapers, BBC, LBC, Talksport, ad naseum racism. We in Britain are, afer all is said and done, racists. Even a recent attack by a Scot on a Scot with an English accent was being investigated by the police as a racist incident….not xenophobia, not nationalism, not brutal thuggery, but RACISM. (I have now typed this word so often in this e-pistle that it has lost its meaning, much the same as when it is heard daily on the radio).
I shall let you into a secret (sotto voce) – Britons are not overfond of foreigners, especially if they don overtly foreign clothing and do not speak English.
As a Welshman I am not overly fond of many Londoners (loud and priggish), Northerners (loud and opinionated), West Wales people (sombre and devious) North wales people (insular and cliquey).
Not racism this, just voicing my preferences. Is that a police car I can hear outside? Oh, and I forgot….Americans because they are loud and overweight.

Posted by Graham of Wales at 5:29 AM on January 21


I know that many female posters to this site are annoyed with what they think are the ‘chauvinistic’ and patronising attitudes of some of the male posters here.
But reading the article above, it does seem the ‘chauvinists’ actually have a strong case.

Posted by Anonymous at 6:40 AM on January 21


Liz Jones’ problem is that she’s highly neurotic and self-obsessed and as such was only ever attractive to those blacks and Asians who see possession(sic)of a white woman as a compensation for the fact that they are not white. A normal white man would find Jones far too high maintenance. Black and Asian men didn’t choose Jones for who she is but for what she is. The fact that she’s divorced and now on the shelf says it all.

Posted by Anonymous at 8:05 AM on January 21


After reading this twice, I still have trouble understanding what she is talking about, other than all whites are racists, of course.

Posted by Frank at 11:48 AM on January 21


Crime and Corruption at the U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services

Crime and Corruption at the U.S. Citizenship &

Immigration Services


Marinka Peschmann, Canada Free Press (Toronto), January 21, 2009

As immigrant rights activists demand immigration reform from the Obama administration, it is critical to acknowledge that concrete reform cannot be achieved as long as the U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services (USCIS) is riddled with corruption and criminal abuse.

Crime and corruption at the USCIS formerly the Immigration and Nationalization Services, (INS) is the dirty secret few politicians dare mention within their vaulted rhetoric calling for urgent immigration reform that never materializes. Thus far, their hollow words and legislative tinkering over the last 20 years produced few results except costing taxpayers a fortune. Worse, this U.S. $2.6 billion agency, under the Clinton and Bush administrations, grew into a dysfunctional anti-lawful immigrant bureaucracy that invites corruption. The USCIS, often the antithesis of law and order, is a ticking bomb with potential to cause severe damage to America.

{snip}

For years federal employees have been caught taking bribes or demanding sexual favors from foreign nationals in exchange for processing their applications to live in America. And for every corrupt official arrested, how many stop taking bribes—temporarily? How many dubious foreign nationals already bribed their way in? There is no real way to measure and exploited foreigners are reluctant to report these crimes for fear of jeopardizing their American dream. All this flagrant corruption occurs in large part because the USCIS is overwhelmed by backlogs from immigrants following America’s laws stuck in the nonsensical and degrading bureaucracy. This is the madness called the USCIS. This is America’s immigration agency.

Take a look:

o In Immigration Labyrinth, Corruption Comes easily—headline, New York Times September 12, 1994. “…the word quickly spread through immigrant communities. Come to the . . . offices of the INS (now USCIS). Bring cash. Buy the right to live or work in the U.S. . . . Smooth-talking middlemen took care of the details, bribing immigration service employees. . . . Every year dozens of INS employees are arrested . . . an investigation . . . during the past decade . . . found that the agency has repeatedly failed to shore up security weaknesses, even when corruption arrests have exposed them over and over again.”

o 7 I.N.S. Employees and 26 Others Are Charged With Selling False Immigration Papers-headline, New York Times, March 13, 1998.” . . . seven employees of the INS and 26 others had been charged with selling fraudulent immigration papers for more than $100,000 in bribes. The case . . . continues to raise questions about how well the agency is addressing its vulnerability to corruption. The scheme grew so brazen, prosecutors said, that some cash bribes were exchanged right inside the INS offices at 26 Federal Plaza in downtown Manhattan.”

o Cash, cars, jewelry: Some corruption cases involving immigration officers—headline, Associated Press, September 24, 2006.

o Immigration Official Pleads Guilty to Falsifying Documents—headline Washington Post, December 1, 2006. “A Department of Homeland Security supervisor pleaded guilty . . . to pocketing more than $600,000 in bribes. . . .”

o U.S. agents accused of aiding Islamist scheme—headline, Washington Times, August 15, 2007. “A criminal investigations report says several USCIS employees are accused of aiding Islamic extremists with identification fraud and of exploiting the visa system for personal gain. The confidential 2006 USCIS report said that despite the severity of the potential security breaches, most are not investigated “due to lack of resources”

o An Agent, A Green Card, and a Demand for Sex—headline, New York Times, March 21, 2008. A USCIS adjudicator was arrested after he was caught on tape, telling a 22-year old Colombian woman, “I want sex,” he said . . . “You get your green card.”

o Top Homeland Security Official Accused of Hiring Illegal Immigrants to Clean Her House—headline, Associated Press, December 5, 2008. “. . . even warning one not to leave the country ‘cause once you leave, you will never be back.’”

For years critical warnings piled up, including when Michael J. Maxwell, former USCIS director of the office of security and investigations, in 2006, at a House subcommittee warned lawmakers that the USCIS is a “dysfunctional agency crippled by corruption both inside and outside that’s trying to handle too many cases with too few employees.

”. . . the system is incapable of ensuring the security of our homeland,” Maxwell testified. But crime lives on at the USCIS.

Last December, former President Bush “expressed regrets about not achieving an overhaul of immigration laws,” but truth be told it is a tragedy that neither the Clinton or Bush Administrations and Congress did not accomplish concrete reform. Instead the USCIS perversely created a pathway to crime, in a taxpayer funded agency that benefits criminals. {snip}

{snip}

Original article

(Posted on January 21, 2009)

State Senator to Introduce Immigration Bill

State Senator to Introduce Immigration Bill

More news stories on Immigration Law

Kevin Rader, WTHR-TV (Indianapolis), January 20, 2009

An Indiana lawmaker is introducing what he calls the toughest immigration bill in the country.

Illegal immigration has been a controversial issue at the Indiana Statehouse for the last couple of years, drawing heated debate in both chambers from both sides of the issue. Senator Mike Delph from Carmel will make it a third year by filing Senate Bill 580. The bill is designed to punish those who harbor, transport or employ illegal immigrants in Indiana.

But it does have a “safe harbor” provision for businesses who verify work status of employees by using the federal e-verify system that confirms citizenship.

{snip}

Under the bill, businesses that employ illegals face three years probation. Second time violators face a 10-day suspension of their business license and third time violators face the permanent loss of their business license in the state.

While the future of the bill may be clouded, it does have a hearing set for February 4 in the Senate’s Pension and Labor Committee.

{snip}

Original article

(Posted on January 21, 2009)