An American Asks: What’s So Bad About The BNP Anyway?

An American Asks: What’s So Bad About The BNP Anyway?

By J. Paige Straley

I’m not a Brit, but as an American and an avid internet observer of the British scene, I have been fascinated to watch the rise of what might be an effective nationalist political party in Britain.

The British National Party, under its leader Nick Griffin, has been touting Britain’s elections for Members of the European Parliament, to be held on June 4, as its breakthrough. It hopes to capture five MEP seats, with the possibility of a few more if all the cards fall its way. (Which seems to be happening, as the extraordinary U.K. House of Commons expenses scandal in Westminster engulfs ever more British MPs of all parties.)

Commenters in the Brit political blogosphere predict anywhere from zero to five seats, with three as the most common guess. Any seats at all will produce public funding for the party, a very substantial boost, and will raise their visibility in Britain.

It’s happened before. Another small party, the United Kingdom Independence Party [UKIP], whose main plank is to take Britain out of the European Union, was very successful in the last MEP election. But UKIP contests few local elections in Britain. For the upcoming June 4 MEP election, polls show it losing ground. Part of this may be the difference in styles. BNP is a bit scruffy and makes a fuss, while UKIP appears to be much more urbane. Unhappy British voters—particularly former Labor voters—appear to like the fuss.

I know I’m not supposed to like the BNP. Because it openly states that ethnicity matters, the British press and TV treat the BNP as if it is toxic waste. The U.S. Mainstream Media follows suit, when it mentions the party at all. The BNP did rise out of the ashes of a more strident National Front Party, and some of its leaders allegedly have or have had radical links (sort of like Obama and Jeremiah Wright, although Griffin has distanced himself much more effectively). All I can say, at a distance of 3000 miles, what the BNP is actually saying and doing now looks rational, reasonable and pretty darn good to me.

Nationalist politics acknowledge the ethnic dimension of nations. Levelers assert there is no difference between peoples, and happily dilute—even replace—the heritage peoples of the West. Nowhere are they more active than in Britain.

I use the term “Heritage Peoples.” This is intuitively obvious, but let us see what BNP says about being “British”:

“We mean the bonds of culture, race, identity and roots of the native White peoples of the British Isles. We have lived in these islands near on 40,000 years. We were made by these islands, and these islands are our home. When we in the BNP talk about being British, we talk about the native peoples who have lived in these islands since before the Stone Age, and the relatively small numbers of peoples of identical race, such as the Saxons, Vikings and Normans, and the Irish, who have come here and assimilated.”[BNP FAQ, 2007]

Indeed, in an April 23 quote, Griffin himself describes the ethnic quality of Britishness in plain language:

“We don’t subscribe to the politically correct fiction that just because they happen to be born in Britain, a Pakistani is a Briton. They’re not. They remain of Pakistani stock,’ he added.

“You can’t say that especially large numbers of people can come from the rest of the world and assume an English identity without denying the English their own identity, and I would say that’s wrong.

“In a very subtle way, it’s a sort of bloodless genocide.’[BNP Updates Language & Concepts Discipline Manual, BNP News, April 27, 2009]

Many whites in Britain appear to be self-haters, and are quite happy to trade Cotswolds country churches for mosques and minarets. So you can imagine the calumny thrown at Griffin over this remark!

Indeed, the “racist” epithet is thrown at BNP every day. BNP replies that it prefers a truly multicultural world where British people are clearly British and peoples from other countries are likewise unmistakable in their provenance. This is not an original policy with BNP, of course—in the second half of the twentieth century colonies of whites throughout the third world were encouraged to pack up and leave.

The BNP’s policies strike me as candid and accessible. Here, for instance, is BNP policy on immigration:

“On current demographic trends, we, the native British people, will be an ethnic minority in our own country within sixty years.

“To ensure that this does not happen, and that the British people retain their homeland and identity, we call for an immediate halt to all further immigration, the immediate deportation of criminal and illegal immigrants, and the introduction of a system of voluntary resettlement whereby those immigrants who are legally here will be afforded the opportunity to return to their lands of ethnic origin assisted by generous financial incentives both for individuals and for the countries in question.”[Policies—BNP Website]

Here is a nationalist party that cherishes its Heritage People and states clearly the goal to retain the traditional ethnic balance of their nation. It recognizes the fact of the demographic tsunami—something even sensible observers in the U.S. shrink from doing. The BNP intends to halt the immigrant flood and roll back the replacement of its Heritage Peoples. What’s wrong with that?

Clever use of the internet has partially defused the uniformly negative media coverage of BNP. The BNP site offers fresh material daily, and it pulls no punches with its stories. There is certainly interest in the site. According to Alexa internet ratings, the BNP has far, far more traffic than Conservatives, LibDems, or Labor.

The BNP forces are also masters of the You Tube media. A single Y-T inquiry with key word “BNP” yielded forty pages of listings, albeit there were many dissenting views such as the one with the uncivilized title, “BNP Are C_nts”. Whichever side of the BNP divide you stand on, if you like your material in movie-form, it’s ready for you.

By no means is BNP a wholly electronic communicator. In those area that offer promise, BNP organizers canvas door to door with pamphlets and face-to-face explanations why BNP says, “Britain first!” This year, for the European Parliament election, it has sent out 29 million pieces of mail!

British race-relation quangos and their fellow travelers in government are well-aware of the BNP and Griffin. In December 2004, he was arrested after a covert taping (by a BBC i.e. tax-funded operative) of a speech before a private gathering. BNP and Griffin identify the increasing Muslim population in Britain as one of the chief threats to the country, and in the December 2004 meeting he was captured on tape as suggesting that Islam was a “…wicked and vicious faith.” He knew that he was treading the edge of the draconian Race Relations law, and further said he could possibly get seven years prison for such a statement. Government pursued just that course, charging four counts of “incitement to racial hatred.” Griffin was eventually acquitted on all counts. Not surprisingly, the BNP proposes to abolish all restrictions on free speech, absent only “…common law restrictions on incitement to violence…”

Another grim reminder of official antipathy: BNP membership—that is, membership in a democratic and legal political party—is grounds for local governments to sack police and teachers. In the fall of 2008 the party membership list was leaked, and many such firings occurred.

Is BNP a one-issue anti-immigration party? Widening its scope seems to have been a part of Griffin’s leadership. The issues of EU membership (out now, please), trade (mild protectionism), job protection (part of the immigration and guest worker issue), crime (unshackle police, allow persons to resist an intruder without penalty), defense (small, competent forces, avoid foreign wars), energy (develop alternative fuels and energy, promote advanced nuclear power), environment, education, and health are all covered in the manifesto. All told BNP’s policy seems to be fairly conventional nationalism, bent on internal improvement and de-emphasizing foreign involvement, with an added tinge of social democracy. Voters certainly have a choice—BNP policies are a rather stark contrast to the Lib-Lab-Con party line.

BNP strategy seems to be to build the party in disaffected regions (London boroughs of Barking and Dagenham, and Burnley northeast of Liverpool are examples), and let success in electing members to local offices (town and city “councilors”) increase the appeal of their brand. BNP is eager for councilors to render good service to constituents, though of course some do poorly in the event—an artifact of governing versus merely opposing government) Electing local councilors builds the party machinery and provides experience in actual government for members, as well as building a positive picture to combat negative propaganda.

There are no BNP Members of Britain’s Parliament at this time. It takes determination, organization, and grit to make an election-winning party from scratch. But the BNP is making progress:

Total votes in General Elections

1983                14,621

1987                    553

1992                  7,631

1997                35,832

2001                47,129

2007              192,748

Make no mistake, the BNP remains very much a minority party. The ’05 results represent only 0.7% of the total voters, country-wide. But the 2007 Welsh showing was 4.3% of the vote, and in the ’08 London Mayoral contest more than 5% of voters went BNP. The party has discrete areas of strength, and these are where it means to win MEP seats.

The stakes are high for Britain. Shall it retain its traditional identity, or become a collection of synthetic citizens, whose opinion is perhaps better polled as mere consumer preference?

It would be interesting to see a country-wide nationalist political party in the US so straightforward in its platform, and so effective in its party-building effort. If BNP are successful on June 4, it will be a lesson to patriots throughout Europe and the US.

Stay tuned, June 4 will be here before you know it!

Diversity Is Strength! It’s Also…African “Refugee” Kidnappers In Virginia

Diversity Is Strength! It’s Also…African “Refugee” Kidnappers In Virginia

By Brenda Walker

Immigration policy has brought an array of cultural beliefs and behaviors which few Americans could have imagined before 1965, when Washington flung the doors open.

Case in point: the recent attempt in Roanoke, Virginia, by three young African teens and one citizen to kidnap wives of wealthy American men for ransom.

The kidnap gang consisted of Luke Musa Elbino (age 19, from Sudan), Joshua Kasongo (19, from Rwanda), Mohammed Hussein Guhad (19, from Somalia) and Anthony Eugene Muse (18, of Roanoke), a local who was willing to use his granny’s rural trailer for stashing their victims. [Vdare.com note: From his photograph, Mr. Muse seems to be a regular African-American, I.E. someone whose ancestors have been in this country since before the Civil War.]

Kasongo is listed as a Roanoke County firefighter (a job Americans won’t do?) and Elbino was a student at a community college. Anthony Muse and Mohammed Guhad were students at Roanoke’s Patrick Henry High School (“Home of the Patriots”!).

Virginia—the mother of Presidents Washington, Jefferson, Madison and others—is apparently becoming another unmelting pot of criminal diversity.

The plot began to come apart on April 6, when the Africans tried to muscle their way into the home of George and Audrey Levicki. The gang posed as Red Cross volunteers doing a door-to-door survey. They had phoned to make sure that Mr. Levicki, CEO of Delta Dental of Virginia, was not there. The kidnappers had researched possible victims on the internet to find wealthy people and had driven around the area looking for big expensive houses.

The scheme fell apart when Mrs. Levicki slammed the door shut on one of the Africans as he tried to push his way in. The gang then jumped into a waiting car to escape, but they were noticed by an alert neighbor who followed until police appeared. (Read the original crime report on WSLS.com.)

As described by the US Attorney’s Office, [PDF]one task of Mohammed Guhad was to assemble various useful items, “including but not limited to duct tape, rope, gloves, disguises and handcuffs”. Elbino used his laptop for victim research and Kasongo was assigned the task of ransom negotiation. Anthony Muse supplied a .32 handgun, but it was not carried during the crime.

The Africans were first charged with breaking and entering, but in time they admitted conspiring to kidnap Audrey Levicki and hold her in a hidden location until her husband ponied up $1-2 million.

The would-be kidnappers had cased another prosperous neighborhood the previous month, but neighbors became suspicious when a carload of young fellows clearly not from the area were taking an undue interest.

An unidentified woman described the gang spying on her with obvious ill intent in March [UPDATED: Three kidnapping suspects plead not guilty, WDBJ7, Roanoke, May 9, 2009].

“She was a target, but never actually approached by the suspects and Friday she shared her thoughts about the plot, the suspects, and her future…

“Back in March, she noticed a car outside her home for two days straight.

News7′s Justin McLeod: How long were they there generally?

Victim: About an hour each day.

News7′s Justin McLeod: And you were telling me you actually looked out the window?

Victim: I pulled the window blind up and clear as day when you look at that from the outside, they saw me see them.

“She called police but it wasn’t until several weeks later that she found out she was part of a kidnapping plot.”

Stupid criminals are still dangerous, just more likely to get caught. And kidnapping is not only a very cruel crime, but one unlikely to be carried off successfully. Curiously, the Africans were smart enough to research potential victims using the internet, but not sufficiently bright to hide their intentions.

When the accused were brought before Judge Michael Urbanski, he commented on the “irony” of the situation:

“Over and over Thursday, the federal judge commented on the irony of the case before him: the children of refugee families who had fled terror and strife in Africa, now accused of a kidnapping plot.” [Emphasis added][Judge denies 3 teens bond in kidnapping case, By Mike Gangloff, Roanoke Times, May 15, 2009]

“Irony”? This situation is not ironic at all. Even when people try to escape violence by leaving the scene, it has become imprinted in their experience. Many bring it with them as immigrants. In a similar way, children of alcoholics can hate booze, but often end up with a drinking problem themselves.

If anything, the case shows the young men brought African values with them. Somalia in particular has been a kidnap center for years and only lately has expanded into seafaring versions, where the activity is called piracy.

Young refugees often appear to accept an American lifestyle. But that acculturation may be style only, a shallow sort of assimilation where the exteriors look right, but there is no deep understanding of the foundational structure, beliefs and responsibility that underlie American freedoms.

Another example of that syndrome: Shirwa Ahmed, the Somali refugee from Minnesota who blew up himself and dozens of others in a suicide bombing in Mogadishu last year. As a young man in Minneapolis, he had friends, dated girls, shot hoops and wore hip-hop clothing. One friend recalled Ahmed condemning suicide bombing as un-Islamic.

But somewhere along the line, Ahmed’s mind became infected with the murderous jihad ideology. Whatever he learned in school and absorbed from American society as a whole, it wasn’t strong enough to defeat in his mind the Islamic agenda of totalitarianism and religious violence. An investigation of his background, The making of a Minnesota suicide bomber [By Richard Meryhew,  Allie Shah And James Walsh, Minneapolis Star-Tribune, May 6, 2009], is fascinating reading—even if Ahmed was only a “Minnesota” bomber to the MSM.

We don’t know much about the Africans in the Virginia kidnapping, other than they weren’t dropouts and they had no previous arrests. The mug shots look plenty menacing but one series of non-criminal pictures are not.

Yet the Africans thought that violently snatching and imprisoning a woman against her will was a fine way to make some easy money. Did it not occur to any of them that violating Audrey Levicki’s freedom was immoral as well as illegal? Or did her lesser status as a female in African culture make her anguish less important?

No crime is more sociopathic than kidnapping. Murder is more immediately hostile, but at least the outcome is known. With criminal kidnapping, the family is literally tortured by not knowing whether their loved one is dead or alive. Sometimes the victim is murdered—like Mexican teen Silvia Vargas or the Lindbergh baby from an earlier era—but the parents may not learn of the death for years.

Hopefully there will be a trial rather than a plea deal, so we can learn more about psychological backgrounds of the African kidnap gang: whether they were war-damaged refugee children with dangerous imprinting of violence, or were just ordinary thugs from the brutal cultures of Sudan, Rwanda and Somalia.

Either way, importing criminally inclined human time bombs through the misplaced do-gooderism (and self-interestedness) of the Refugee Industry has been a terrible idea.

There is a growing list of victims, like Marilyn Bethell of Aurora, Illinois, who was murdered in 2005 by a young Sudanese refugee whose life in America was one long rap sheet.

More fortunate were the Salt Lake City school kids who survived their run in with a depressed Sudanese refugee who tried to run them down with his car in early May. Still, Salt Lake experienced an earlier deadly refugee rampage in 2007 when an 18-year-old Bosnian, Suleiman Talovic, shot and killed six people at a mall.

It is a really bad idea to welcome psychologically distressed, culturally maladjusted people at any time—and doubly so when there are no jobs to keep them busy. Refugees are high maintenance, and they do not appear to be getting the attention they need.

Either the well-paid refugee experts should help them more, instead of dumping them on the American taxpayer, or Washington should bring in a lot fewer refugees, as in zero.

Or, ideally, both.

Sonia Sotomayor And Obama’s Idea of Justice

Sonia Sotomayor And Obama’s Idea of Justice

By Patrick J. Buchanan

When you think about it, Sonia Sotomayor is the perfect pick for the Supreme Court—in Barack Obama’s America.

Like Obama, himself a beneficiary of affirmative action, she thinks “Latina women,” because of their life experience, make better judicial decisions than white men, that discrimination against white men to advance people of color is what America is all about, that appellate courts are “where policy is made” in the United States.

To those who believe the depiction of our first Hispanic justice as an anti-white liberal judicial activist, hearken to her own words.

Speaking at Berkeley in 2001, Sonia told her audience, “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion (as a judge) than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”

Imagine if Sam Alito had said at Bob Jones University, “I would hope that a wise white male with the richness of his life experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Hispanic woman, who hasn’t lived that life.”

Alito would have been toast. No explanation, no apology would have spared him. He would have been branded for life a white bigot.

Judge Sotomayor will be excused because the media agree with her and she is a Latina who will use her court seat to impose upon the nation the values of the National Council of La Raza (The Race), of which she is a member.

Indeed, she sees this as her mission. Speaking at Duke in 2005, Sotomayor declared: “(The) court of appeals is where policy is made. I know this is on tape, [YouTube] and I should never say that because we don’t make law I know.” She and the audience joined in the laughter.

Who were they laughing at? Americans who still believe the role of judges is to apply the Constitution as the Framers intended and to interpret the law as written by our elected legislators.

In Barack Obama’s America, that is so yesterday.

Sotomayor’s support for discrimination against white males was on exhibit when Ricci v. DeStefano came before a three-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals on which Sotomayor sits.

Frank Ricci is the New Haven firefighter who, suffering from dyslexia but desperate to realize his dream of becoming an officer, quit his second job, bought $1,000 worth of books and had a friend read them to him to prepare for the crucial exam. He made it, coming in sixth among 77 firefighters, qualifying for promotion to lieutenant.

A problem immediately arose. Seems that of those who qualified for promotion, all but one were white, and he was a Hispanic.

Can’t have that. So, the New Haven City Council, under pressure from the usual suspects, threw out the tests, refused to promote Ricci or any white firemen, and called for new tests—to produce greater diversity. In other words, get rid of at least some of those white guys who somehow managed to come in near or at the top of their class.

Ricci and 19 other firemen sued, claiming they had been denied the promotions they had won for one reason: They were white.

What did Sotomayor’s three-judge panel do with Ricci’s appeal of the district court decision that turned him down? She tried to kill and bury it in a single dismissive unpublished paragraph so Ricci and the white firefighters would never get a hearing in the Supreme Court.

Stuart Taylor, former New York Times Supreme Court reporter and a National Journal columnist, charges Sotomayor with engaging “in a process so peculiar as to fan suspicions that some or all of the judges were embarrassed by the ugliness of the actions that they were blessing and were trying to sweep quietly under the rug, perhaps to avoid Supreme Court review or public criticism, or both.”

Had it not been for the intervention of Judge Jose Cabranes—a Clinton appointee outraged that so momentous a case was being put in a dumpster—Sotomayor’s misconduct might never have been uncovered, and those firemen would forever be denied their chance for justice.

The process by which Sotomayor was selected testifies to what we can expect in Obama’s America. Not a single male was in the final four. And she was picked over the three other women because she was a person of color, a “two-fer.” Affirmative action start to finish.

Reading 30 of her opinions, GW law professor Jonathan Turley found them “notable” for “lack of depth.”

Liberal law professor and Supreme Court expert Jeff Rosen of The New Republic reports, after talking to prosecutors and law clerks, that Sotomayor covers up her intellectual inadequacy by bullying from the bench.

The lady is a lightweight.

What should Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee do?

Abjure the vicious tactics Democrats used on Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas and Sam Alito. Lay out the lady’s record. And let America get a close look at the kind of justice Barack Obama believes in.

The Truth About ObamACORN

The Truth About ObamACORN

By Michelle Malkin

Left-wing groups in Washington, D.C., are panicked. The New York Times and other Team Obama whitewashers are downplaying the connection between the Obama presidential campaign, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) and Obama’s old employer Project Vote (ACORN’s nonprofit canvassing arm). Alas, the truth keeps seeping out.

At a closed-door powwow hosted Thursday at the left-leaning Center for American Progress, activists discussed how to combat a relentless stream of corruption charges from ACORN/Project Vote whistleblowers. But it’s too late for a reputation bailout. Former Project Vote official and whistleblower Anita MonCrief has harnessed the Internet to crowd-source a massive cache of documents showing ties between Obama staff members and the supposedly “nonpartisan” ACORN operations.

Last fall, The New York Times abandoned an investigation into whether Obama had shared donor lists with Project Vote, a 501(c)(3) organization that is prohibited from engaging in political activity. Public editor Clark Hoyt earlier this month called it “the tip that didn’t pan out.” Critics suggested the donor lists could have been compiled through public records. But I have obtained the lists—not only of Obama donors, but also lists of Democratic National Committee, Hillary Clinton and John Kerry contributors. The records include small donors to the Obama campaign, who are not disclosed in public campaign finance databases. It’s information only a campaign could supply.

MonCrief testified under oath last fall that her then-boss, Karyn Gillette, gave her the Obama donor list and told her the campaign had furnished it. Moreover, e-mail messages between ACORN, Project Vote and other affiliates, including ACORN subsidiary Citizens Services, Inc. (CSI), make explicit references to working on “Obama campaign related projects.” The “list of maxed out Obama donors” is specifically mentioned in staff e-mail. Another message from ACORN/Project Vote official Nathan Henderson-James warns ACORN and affiliated staff to prepare for “conservatives … gearing up a major oppo research project on Obama.”

Henderson-James wrote, “Understand I’m not suggesting that we gear up to defend a candidate’s campaign.” But that, of course, is exactly what the ACORN enterprise did.

Why does this matter? Transparency, tax dollars and electoral integrity. ACORN’s own lawyer Elizabeth Kingsley acknowledged last year that a vast web of tax-exempt ACORN affiliates were shuffling money around—making it almost impossible to track whether campaign rules and tax regulations were being followed. ACORN receives 40 percent of its revenues from taxpayers. Americans deserve to know whether and how much commingling of public money with political projects has occurred over the last four decades—and what role the Obama campaign played in this enterprise.

Remember: Last August, the Obama team admitted its failure to properly disclose $800,000 in payments to CSI—which works hand in hand with Project Vote and the ACORN parent organization. Obama mysteriously reclassified the campaign advance work expenditures as “get-out-the-vote” activities. Nary a peep from electoral integrity watchdogs.

Despite heated denials from Team Obama, the links between ACORN, Project Vote and CSI are inextricable. As Obama himself reminded ACORN leaders after its political action committee endorsed his presidential candidacy in February 2008:

“I come out of a grassroots organizing background. That’s what I did for three and half years before I went to law school. That’s the reason I moved to Chicago was to organize. So this is something that I know personally, the work you do, the importance of it. I’ve been fighting alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career. Even before I was an elected official, when I ran Project Vote voter registration drive in Illinois, ACORN was smack dab in the middle of it, and we appreciate your work.”

As I’ve reported before, the Obama campaign’s “Vote for Change” registration drive, run simultaneously with ACORN/Project Vote, was an all-out scramble to scrape up every last unregistered voter sympathetic to Obama’s big-government vision.

In an e-mail message to whistleblower MonCrief last summer, New York Times reporter Stephanie Strom told the truth: “The real story to all this is how these myriad entities allow them to shuffle money around so much that no one really knows what’s getting spent on what.” By Oct. 6, 2008, Strom had thrown in the towel in the wake of blistering phone conversations with the Obama campaign. She wrote:

“I’m calling a halt to my efforts. I just had two unpleasant calls with the Obama campaign, wherein the spokesman was screaming and yelling and cursing me, calling me a right-wing nut and a conspiracy theorist and everything else. … I’d still like to get that file from you when you have a chance to send it. One of these days, the truth is going to come out.”

It’s only just begun.

Then and now, and the short distance between – Jefferson views on RACE!

Then and now, and the short distance between

by The Narrator

The following text was written by Thomas Jefferson two centuries ago. The subject: blacks. His observations and conclusions look surprisingly fresh and modern in both the good and bad sense.

For example the first president of the Banana Republic of North America comes to mind when Jefferson states:

They astonish you with strokes of the most sublime oratory….But never yet could I find that a black had uttered a thought above the level of plain narration….He is often happy in the turn of his compliments, and his style is easy and familiar, except when he affects a Shandean fabrication of words. But his imagination is wild and extravagant, escapes incessantly from every restraint of reason and taste, and, in the course of its vagaries, leaves a tract of thought as incoherent and eccentric, as is the course of a meteor through the sky. His subjects should often have led him to a process of sober reasoning: yet we find him always substituting sentiment for demonstration.

The existence of rap and hip-hop seems quite natural, as centuries ago it is observed that blacks:

In music…are more generally gifted than the whites with accurate ears for tune and time, and they have been found capable of imagining a small catch. Whether they will be equal to the composition of a more extensive run of melody, or of complicated harmony, is yet to be proved.

Indeed the verdict is still out.

His most profound observation on them, though, is at the heart of why any kind of social/political/religious agreement or mutual understanding with them is impossible. He writes of them:

They are more ardent after their female: but love seems with them to be more an eager desire, than a tender delicate mixture of sentiment and sensation. Their griefs are transient. Those numberless afflictions, which render it doubtful whether heaven has given life to us in mercy or in wrath, are less felt, and sooner forgotten with them. In general, their existence appears to participate more of sensation than reflection.

Most interesting of all though is Jefferson’s seeming moments of slipping into sentimental leftism that seems a habit of some Whites. For example, of black crime he writes (the very modern looking apologetic):

That disposition to theft with which they have been branded, must be ascribed to their situation, and not to any depravity of the moral sense.

Of course, as their situation has changed much over the past two hundred years while their proclivity towards crime remained unabated, we can see the faulty conclusion of Jefferson’s appraisal. It’s his motivation for writing such that is of interest, though.

In his concluding sentence we can see the all too familiar appeal to religion and a murky notion of “social justice” as Jefferson writes:

The spirit of the master is abating, that of the slave rising from the dust, his condition mollifying, the way I hope preparing, under the auspices of heaven, for a total emancipation, and that this is disposed, in the order of events, to be with the consent of the masters, rather than by their extirpation.

Naturally that can also be read as a warning. Still it’s interesting to see Jefferson do what so many in our own time do in coming to a natural conclusion on the obvious differences in the races, yet flirting with the idea that he wishes it were not so and that it will one day, miraculously, go away.

Like so many Whites of modern North America, Thomas Jefferson makes reasonable deductions based on an abundance of study and observations on the undeniable and profound fact of the multitude of differences in the races, yet still wishes to imagine that it will all resolve itself in some egalitarian utopia at some unspecified future date under some mysterious bit of magical circumstance.

The text is interesting not in so much as it represents a mirror image of our thoughts as modern White Americans, but as more of an old home movie of how those thoughts used to look.

Here it is in full.

Views on Negro Slavery
by Thomas Jefferson

It will probably be asked, Why not retain and incorporate the blacks into the state, and thus save the expense of supplying, by importation of white settlers, the vacancies they will leave? Deep rooted prejudices entertained by the whites; ten thousand recollections, by the blacks, of the injuries they have sustained; new provocations; the real distinctions which nature has made; and many other circumstances, will divide us into parties, and produce convulsions, which will probably never end but in the extermination of the one or the other race. To these objections, which are political, may be added others, which are physical and moral. The first difference which strikes us is that of colour. Whether the black of the negro resides in the reticular membrane between the skin and scarf-skin, or in the scarf-skin itself; whether it proceeds from the colour of the blood, the colour of the bile, or from that of some other secretion, the difference is fixed in nature, and is as real as if its seat and cause were better known to us. And is this difference of no importance? Is it not the foundation of a greater or less share of beauty in the two races? Are not the fine mixtures of red and white, the expressions of every passion by greater or less suffusions of colour in the one, preferable to that eternal monotony, which reigns in the countenances, that immovable veil of black which covers all the emotions of the other race? Add to these, flowing hair, a more elegant symmetry of form, their own judgment in favour of the whites, declared by their preference of them, as uniformly as is the preference of the Oranootan for the black women over those of his own species. The circumstance of superior beauty, is thought worthy attention in the propagation of our horses, dogs, and other domestic animals; why not in that of man? Besides those of colour, figure, and hair, there are other physical distinctions proving a difference of race. They have less hair on the face and body. They secrete less by the kidneys, and more by the glands of the skin, which gives them a very strong and disagreeable odour. This greater degree of transpiration renders them more tolerant of heat, and less so of cold than the whites. Perhaps too a difference of structure in the pulmonary apparatus, which a late ingenious experimentalist has discovered to be the principal regulator of animal heat, may have disabled them from extricating, in the act of inspiration, so much of that fluid from the outer air, or obliged them in expiration, to part with more of it. They seem to require less sleep. A black after hard labour through the day, will be induced by the slightest amusements to sit up till midnight, or later, though knowing he must be out with the first dawn of the morning. They are at least as brave, and more adventuresome. But this may perhaps proceed from a want of forethought, which prevents their seeing a danger till it be present. When present, they do not go through it with more coolness or steadiness than the whites. They are more ardent after their female: but love seems with them to be more an eager desire, than a tender delicate mixture of sentiment and sensation. Their griefs are transient. Those numberless afflictions, which render it doubtful whether heaven has given life to us in mercy or in wrath, are less felt, and sooner forgotten with them. In general, their existence appears to participate more of sensation than reflection. To this must be ascribed their disposition to sleep when abstracted from their diversions, and unemployed in labour. An animal whose body is at rest, and who does not reflect, must be disposed to sleep of course. Comparing them by their faculties of memory, reason, and imagination, it appears to me that in memory they are equal to the whites; in reason much inferior, as I think one could scarcely be found capable of tracing and comprehending the investigations of Euclid; and that in imagination they are dull, tasteless, and anomalous. It would be unfair to follow them to Africa for this investigation.

We will consider them here, on the same stage with the whites, and where the facts are not apocryphal on which a judgment is to be formed. It will be right to make great allowances for the difference of condition, of education, of conversation, of the sphere in which they move. Many millions of them have been brought to, and born in America. Most of them indeed have been confined to tillage, to their own homes, and their own society: yet many have been so situated, that they might have availed themselves of the conversation of their masters; many have been brought up to the handicraft arts, and from that circumstance have always been associated with the whites. Some have been liberally educated, and all have lived in countries where the arts and sciences are cultivated to a considerable degree, and have had before their eyes samples of the best works from abroad. The Indians, with no advantages of this kind, will often carve figures on their pipes not destitute of design and merit. They will crayon out an animal, a plant, or a country, so as to prove the existence of a germ in their minds which only wants cultivation. They astonish you with strokes of the most sublime oratory; such as prove their reason and sentiment strong, their imagination glowing and elevated. But never yet could I find that a black had uttered a thought above the level of plain narration; never saw even an elementary trait of painting or sculpture. In music they are more generally gifted than the whites with accurate ears for tune and time, and they have been found capable of imagining a small catch.

Whether they will be equal to the composition of a more extensive run of melody, or of complicated harmony, is yet to be proved. Misery is often the parent of the most affecting touches in poetry. Among the blacks is misery enough, God knows, but no poetry. Love is the peculiar oestrum of the poet. Their love is ardent, but it kindles the senses only, not the imagination. Religion indeed has produced a Phyllis Whately but it could not produce a poet. The compositions published under her name are below the dignity of criticism. The heroes of the Dunciad are to her, as Hercules to the author of that poem. Ignatius Sancho has approached nearer to merit in composition; yet his letters do more honour to the heart than the head. They breathe the purest effusions of friendship and general philanthropy, and show how great a degree of the latter may be compounded with strong religious zeal. He is often happy in the turn of his compliments, and his style is easy and familiar, except when he affects a Shandean fabrication of words. But his imagination is wild and extravagant, escapes incessantly from every restraint of reason and taste, and, in the course of its vagaries, leaves a tract of thought as incoherent and eccentric, as is the course of a meteor through the sky. His subjects should often have led him to a process of sober reasoning: yet we find him always substituting sentiment for demonstration. Upon the whole, though we admit him to the first place among those of his own colour who have presented themselves to the public judgment, yet when we compare him with the writers of the race among whom he lived and particularly with the epistolary class, in which he has taken his own stand, we are compelled to enrol him at the bottom of the column. This criticism supposes the letters published under his name to be genuine, and to have received amendment from no other hand; points which would not be of easy investigation.

The improvement of the blacks in body and mind, in the first instance of their mixture with the whites, has been observed by every one, and proves that their inferiority is not the effect merely of their condition of life. We know that among the Romans, about the Augustan age especially, the condition of their slaves was much more deplorable than that of the blacks on the continent of America. The two sexes were confined in separate apartments, because to raise a child cost the master more than to buy one. Cato, for a very restricted indulgence to his slaves in this particular, took from them a certain price. But in this country the slaves multiply as fast as the free inhabitants. Their situation and manners place the commerce between the two sexes almost without restraint. The same Cato, on a principle of economy, always sold his sick and superannuated slaves. He gives it as a standing precept to a master visiting his farm, to sell his old oxen, old wagons, old tools, old and diseased servants, and every thing else become useless…. The American slaves cannot enumerate this among the injuries and insults they receive. It was the common practice to expose in the island Esculapius, in the Tyber, diseased slaves, whose cure was like to become tedious. The emperor Claudius, by an edict, gave freedom to such of them as should recover, and first declared that if any person chose to kill rather than expose them, it should be deemed homicide. The exposing them is a crime of which no instance has existed with us; and were it to be followed by death, it would be punished capitally. We are told of a certain Vedius Pollio, who, in the presence of Augustus, would have given a slave as food to his fish, for having broken a glass. With the Romans, the regular method of taking the evidence of their slaves was under torture. Here it has been thought better never to resort to their evidence. When a master was murdered, all his slaves, in the same house, or within hearing, were condemned to death. Here punishment falls on the guilty only, and as precise proof is required against him as against a freeman. Yet notwithstanding these and other discouraging circumstances among the Romans, their slaves were often their rarest artists. They excelled too in science, insomuch as to be usually employed as tutors to their masters’ children. Epictetus, Terence, and Phaedrus, were slaves. But they were of the race of whites. It is not their condition then, but nature, which has produced the distinction. Whether further observation will or will not verify the conjecture, that nature has been less bountiful to them in the endowments of the head, I believe that in those of the heart she will be found to have done them justice. That disposition to theft with which they have been branded, must be ascribed to their situation, and not to any depravity of the moral sense. The man, in whose favour no laws of property exist, probably feels himself less bound to respect those made in favour of others. When arguing for ourselves, we lay it down as a fundamental, that laws, to be just, must give a reciprocation of right; that, without this, they are mere arbitrary rules of conduct, founded in force, and not in conscience: and it is a problem which I give to the master to solve, whether the religious precepts against the violation of property were not framed for him as well as his slave? And whether the slave may not as justifiably take a little from one, who has taken all from him, as he may slay one who would slay him? That a change in the relations in which a man is placed should change his ideas of moral right or wrong, is neither new, nor peculiar to the colour of the blacks. Homer tells us it was so 2600 years ago. Jove fix’d it certain, that whatever day makes man a slave, takes half his worth away.

But the slaves of which Homer speaks were whites. Notwithstanding these considerations which must weaken their respect for the laws of property, we find among them numerous instances of the most rigid integrity, and as many as among their better instructed masters, of benevolence, gratitude and unshaken fidelity. The opinion, that they are inferior in the faculties of reason and imagination, must be hazarded with great diffidence. To justify a general conclusion, requires many observations, even where the subject may be submitted to the anatomical knife, to optical classes, to analysis by fire, or by solvents. How much more then where it is a faculty, not a substance, we are examining; where it eludes the research of all the Senses; where the conditions of its existence are various and variously combined; where the effects of those which are present or absent bid defiance to calculation; let me add too, as a circumstance of great tenderness, where our conclusion would degrade a whole race of men from the rank in the scale of beings which their Creator may perhaps have given them. To our reproach it must be said, that though for a century and a half we have had under our eyes the races of black and of red men, they have never yet been viewed by us as subjects of natural history. I advance it therefore as a suspicion only, that the blacks, whether originally a distinct race, or made distinct by time and circumstances, are inferior to the whites in the endowments both of body and mind. It is not against experience to suppose, that different Species of the same genus, or varieties of the same species, may possess different qualifications. Will not a lover of natural history then, one who views the gradations in all the races of animals with the eye of philosophy, excuse an effort to keep those in the department of man as distinct as nature has formed them? This unfortunate difference of colour, and perhaps of faculty, is a powerful obstacle to the emancipation of these people. Many of their advocates, while they wish to vindicate the liberty of human nature are anxious also to preserve its dignity and beauty. Some of these, embarrassed by the question “What further is to be done with them?” join themselves in opposition with those who are actuated by sordid avarice only. Among the Romans emancipation required but one effort. The slave, when made free, might mix with, without staining the blood of his master. But with us a second is necessary, unknown to history. When freed, he is to be removed beyond the reach of mixture.

The particular customs and manners that may happen to be received in that state? It is difficult to determine on the standard by which the manners of a nation may be tried, whether catholic, or particular. It is more difficult for a native to bring to that standard the manners of his own nation, familiarized to him by habit. There must doubtless be an unhappy influence on the manners of our people produced by the existence of slavery among us. The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other. Our children see this, and learn to imitate it; for man is an imitative animal. This quality is the germ of all education in him. From his cradle to his grave he is learning to do what he sees others do. If a parent could find no motive either in his philanthropy or his self love, for restraining the intemperance of passion towards his slave, it should always be a sufficient one that his child is present. But generally it is not sufficient. The parent storms, the child looks on, catches the lineaments of wrath, puts on the same airs in the circle of smaller slaves, gives a loose to the worst of passions, and thus nursed, educated, and daily exercised in tyranny, cannot but be stamped by it with odious pecularities. The man must be a prodigy who can retain his manners and morals undepraved by such circumstances. And with what execration should the statesman be loaded, who, permitting one half the citizens thus to trarnple on the rights of the other, transforms those into despots, and these into enemies, destroys the morals of the one part, and the amor patriae of the other. For if a slave can have a country in this world, it must be any other in preference to that in which he is born to live and labour for another; in which he must lock up the faculties of his nature, contribute as far as depends on his individual endeavours to the evanishment of the human race, or entail his own miserable condition on the endless generations proceeding from him. With the morals of the people, their industry also is destroyed. For in a warm climate, no man will labour for himself who can make another labour for him. This is so true, that of the proprietors of slaves a very small proportion indeed are ever seen to labour. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for ever: that considering numbers, nature and natural means only, a revolution of the wheel of fortune, an exchange of situation is among possible events: that it may become probable by supernatural interference! The almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in such a contest. But it is impossible to be temperate and to pursue this subject through the various considerations of policy, of morals, of history natural and civil. We must be contented to hope they will force their way into every one’s mind. I think a change already perceptible, since the origin of the present revolution. The spirit of the master is abating, that of the slave rising from the dust, his condition mollifying, the way I hope preparing, under the auspices of heaven, for a total emancipation, and that this is disposed, in the order of events, to be with the consent of the masters, rather than by their extirpation.

For socialism to succeed, capitalism must failThe Obama Plan To Destroy America

For socialism to succeed, capitalism must fail


For socialism to succeed, capitalism must fail, thus the new administration’s agenda

By Tom Randall

Date: February 3, 2009 Issue: To some of our liberal friends (we do still have some, to the amazement of some of our conservative friends…lighten up all of you) would balk at the suggestion that the administration is socialist, not merely left-of-center.  Many would also cringe at the suggestion that the administration would continue the destruction of capitalism to reach its ends seems implausible.  To that we would respond with a paraphrase of the old country and western line: “Who are you going to believe, President Obama or your lyin’ eyes?” Capitalism, with its ability to generate wealth, not simply re-distribute poverty, stands as a powerful repudiation of the failures of modern socialism.  While capitalism exists, socialism cannot thrive.  Therefore, socialists must destroy capitalism to succeed.  The most expeditious way to defeat capitalism is to control what sustains it in a modern world: Abundant, affordable energy — the underpinning of the means of production. To see how this administration aims to defeat capitalism that was under siege even in the last administration, we need look no further than a few Obama appointments.  Remember when looking at these appointments, D.C. is an insiders’ town. You have to know how to work within its complexities.  You have to know the back channels.  You have to develop a gut feel of when “yes” means “no” and “no” means “yes.”  Who can do a thing and who cannot.  To wit:

• Secretary of Energy Steven Chu: Dr. Chu is a learned enough man.  He has run Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory.  He is a scientist, though his swallowing of global warming theory after simply reading the IPCC report, raises doubts in this area.  He is a Washington neophyte who will be running what many of its employees call the most dysfunctional department in D.C.

• Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar:  Salazar is a three-term congressional back-bencher from Colorado who has barely had time to learn how to get around on the Metro, let alone drive his department.

• Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson: She is the former New Jersey EPA head.  Unfortunately, New Jersey is not the U.S. EPA — an agency still heavily salted with plants left over from the days Carol Browner ran the U.S. EPA and the Bush administration was too politically inept to root out.  And, it is the return of Ms. Browner that makes these three seemingly innocuous appointments so significant.

• White House Energy Czar Carol M. Browner: Browner, former EPA administrator under Bill Clinton and prominent member of Socialist International, did everything she could to hobble the energy industry during her tenure with the agency.  Many who came to the agency during her tenure remain in place.  She is an experienced and skilled Washington operative. While the first three appointees share many of her views, it is Browner who knows better how to run the machinery of government and accomplish her purposes. It will be Browner, ensconced in the West Wing, who will quietly, deftly, behind the scenes, call the shots at Energy, Interior and EPA.

Obama Economic Plan 101 How to destroy Capitalism

The core of Obama’s economic plan is to tax people who are making money.

There is 4 ways Obama is going to tax people so you need to pay close attention here.

1. If you earn more than $97,000.  He has said those who have assets of $250,000 but corrected that statement a week later but with Obama you never know because he says one thing and means it then retracts it if there is an outcry because it is just plain wrong and stupid.

2. Tax capital gains.  Not just businesses but any citizen who has a capital gains.

3.  Tax 401k retirement accounts.

4. Increase the payroll tax

These three items he has repeated time and again.

None of these 3 items help mainstreet USA but harm it. It drives jobs overseas and it prevents any business from reinvestments or engaging in expansion because they would get taxed in addition to the costs of the expansion. Thus they get hit twice.  It will freeze some jobs and eliminate millions more.

Hey listen to Obama himself as he explains how he is going to bring down Capitalism and destroy America.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owA2geM8OGg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7wlDtfs1AM&feature=related

Fundamental flaw is that economics never have worked bottom up! Why? The poor often waist the money because the amounts given to the poor are not enough to meet their requirements to make them active spenders that would effect the economy. Secondly, there is no benefit to businesses to offer new incinatives because it does not guarantee new business but it does promise to tax that business out of existence.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4iy2OfScQE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po7J0f5TMrQ&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po7J0f5TMrQ&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCMieWnY9uo&feature=related

Obama admits his tax plan hurts the economy but he would still like to tax America to death.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7fSZiZG91o&feature=related

Just to make this clear. Under Obama 401ks will loose value because according to Obama they are part of the greedy Wall Street system. Obama does not care that 401k are tied to the stock market and 401ks are the primary block or group which has capital gains within wall Street.

Thus under Obama, people with 401k will have to pay taxes to save for retirement because they will have to pay the capital gains tax.  Obama from his own mouth if you listen to him wants to raise the capital gains back to 28%  from its current 15% then see if it needs another hike not to exceed 10% more.

In other words according to Obama, It only fair for those who do not work and never pay taxes to have a right to the money of people who do work in the interest of fairness a weath redistrobution plan to take money from people’d 401ks to give it to someone who does not pay taxes and may not have worked in their life. Obama is willing to tax retired people and those who are wanting to retire  with an up to 38% capital gains tax in conjunction to the payroll tax increase of an additional 6% along with taxing people who make more than $97,000.

After all, Obama identified the cut off problem of $97,000 in taxes as a way to punish millionares. The problem is that it punishes those who make more than $97,000. Obama loves to make double talk. But even with his $200,000 to $250,000 cap which keep changing by the day which it is. He says that if people who make more than $97,000 has capital gains and owns property, they get taxed on their income because millionares use a provision in the tax code which is set at that amount.

In other words, If you own stock, or a 401k and own property, you get an income tax increase because Obama wants to punish you because you are successful to give you money to people who are poor.

That is not capitalism that is Communism!  Wealth redistrobution is not a socialist stand but a communist one.  Socialism is where Government owns most things and gives all the entitlements because there is no real priviate sector. Communism is the same but, redistrobutes wealth so that everyone gets the same bite at the apple so to speak. The problem is that its fundamentally flawed because there is always people who are the movers who make money and make new business. Then there is those who refuse to do that. Then you have the dregs who refuse to even work but expect a handout for nothing.

Obama wants to punish people for making money and achieving some kind of success.

Say No to Obama come elelction because an Obama president and a democratic controled congress will destroy capitalism once and for all in this country with their plans of taking money from one group of people to give it to another group of people.  Its just a matter of where they line is drawn.

Obama made the case that the line is to be drawn at $97,000 for most people. Then the rest gets it at $200,000.

Say No to Obama because his economic plan is a disaster for America!

The Obama Plan To Destroy America

The vast majority of Americans even if they oppose Obama think that he has the best interests of America in mind like gentleman in the video above who does a brilliant analysis of the current economic crisis and how it could end in the same type of hyperinflation that wrecked Germany in 1920s and led to the rise of Hitler. My contention is that Obama and Company view the results of the 2008 election as a mandate to destroy capitalism and America as we know it. The way to accomplish this goal is to make bad economic decisions by design and throw the country into poverty and anarchy with the goal of seizing complete political control.

The only problem with this plan is that the opposition may decide to launch a civil war against the Marxist authors of destruction and hang them high. This was happened in Chile in 1973 when an Obama type president attempted to turn that country with deep democratic and capitalist roots into a “People’s Republic.”

DETAILS OF OBAMA’S PLAN TO DESTROY AMERICA

February 07, 2009
The Cloward/Piven Strategy of Economic Recovery
By Nancy Coppock

Using borrowed money for a band-aid bailout of the economy should seem backwards to most people. However, it likely is a planned strategy to promote radical change. Those naively believing that President Obama is simply rewarding his far-left base, and will then move to the political center, must wise up.

The assumption that Obama will need the nation to prosper in order to protect the 2010 mid-term election incorrectly assumes that he esteems free market capitalism. He does not. Rather than win through superior ideas and policies, the Democrat plan for success in the mid-term elections is to win by destroying political opposition.

Obama adheres to the Saul Alinksy Rules for Radicals method of politics, which teaches the dark art of destroying political adversaries. However, that text reveals only one front in the radical left’s war against America. The Cloward/Piven Strategy is another method employed by the radical Left to create and manage crisis. This strategy explains Rahm Emanuel’s ominous statement, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”

The Cloward/Piven Strategy is named after Columbia University sociologists Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. Their goal is to overthrow capitalism by overwhelming the government bureaucracy with entitlement demands. The created crisis provides the impetus to bring about radical political change.

According to Discover the Networks.org:

Rather than placating the poor with government hand-outs, wrote Cloward and Piven, activists should work to sabotage and destroy the welfare system; the collapse of the welfare state would ignite a political and financial crisis that would rock the nation… [Emphasis added.]

Making an already weak economy even worse is the intent of the Cloward/Piven Strategy. It is imperative that we view the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan’s spending on items like food stamps, jobless benefits, and health care through this end goal. This strategy explains why the Democrat plan to “stimulate” the economy involves massive deficit spending projects. It includes billions for ACORN and its subgroups such as SHOP and the Neighborhood Stabilization Program. Expanding the S-Chip Program through deficit spending in a supposed effort to “save the children” only makes a faltering economy worse.

If Congress were to allow a robust economy, parents would be able to provide for their children themselves by earning and keeping more of their own money. Democrats, quick to not waste a crisis, would consider that a lost opportunity.

The Cato Institute reports that the plan will harm a faltering economy, intentionally causing increased job losses leading to increased demands for the aforementioned programs. Even the jobs to be created are set apart to render social justice, not economic revival. Robert Reich believes new infrastructure jobs should not go to white construction workers. Meanwhile, workers at Microsoft, IBM, Texas Instruments, and the retail market find themselves experiencing the life of the welfare poor.

If highly educated and trained workers continue to lose jobs and business falters as a whole, where will these jobless workers go? Could this be construed as revolutionary social reorganization that puts the underachiever above the achiever? Where is the future economic strength when jobless professionals collect welfare and unemployment while dreaming of a minimum wage job? For whites, there’s not even the hope of a good paying construction job.

Because these programs are financed with deficit spending, the effect of the Cloward/Piven Strategy becomes doubly destructive. Talk about a perfect storm! The Democrat stimulus plan is a mechanism whose goal is the destruction of the traditional American way of life. It is bitter irony that the American taxpayer will actually fund the destruction of his own ability to live according to the values of our Founding Documents. It is not alarmist to identify this situation as a coup d’etat.

As the flow of money from the top of the economy dries up, job losses and mortgage busts will mount exponentially. The Democrat stimulus plan provides for welfare expansion but not for a robust economy that creates high paying jobs. Is this what Obama means when he warns, “It’s going to get worse before it gets better?” If we are not bailing out corporate America so they can regain profitability, we must conclude Obama is working toward another end goal. Recognizing these attack methods reveals the only logical response — an unwavering wall of “No!”

Obama is the King of double talk and he knows well how to hide what he really is saying.

But the truth is that for the vast majority of the people is that they will see their taxes go up and they will see jobs losses of the likes not seen since the Great Depression.

Why, Because you can not tax businesses out of business. In 1941, American either suspended or cut taxes on the all US manufacturing business to an all time low of 7%.

It created jobs and even after WWII the manufacturing sector held that 7% for all manufacturing till 1949. It was and still is the greatest economic boom for US manufacturing.

Imagine if that was put back into practice today, Lower manufacturing or new Technology businesses to 7% in addition to other perks.

Fundamentally, you would see a growth in manufacturing jobs! In fact, if the rate was dropped to 5.5% it would offset the benefits of companies using China labor! It would be cheaper to make the goods here in the US!

If you have very high economic boom in conjunction to very high job creation rates it would look like an emerging market.

This could happen in the US. We actually need to cut rates to businesses but temper those cuts with oversight and proper regulation.

The housing markets have to be corrected. That has to be done. Otherwise we will see another collapse of the housing market for the 5th time.

3 of the past reasons along with the current crisis were caused by the exact same reason. Why the leaders have not yet learned from history and the mistakes is beyond me.

1. Anytime a Bank or any lender can buy the note at an Auction which they control, it creates a conflict of interest. This conflict of interest causes preditory agression of the lender against the borrower to gain access to the property for high value than the note when the proptery has a greater market value than the maturity value of the note they hold.

To this end, Banks or other lenders have to be forbidden from ever having the right to buy any property which they had at any time an interest in the note over the borrower. This prevents banks from selling the note to another bank which another bank could foreclose.

2. If a borrower defaults on his responsibility to pay, then the banks foreclose and sell the property to the highest bidder at auction. Since the banks can not buy the real fire sale price of the home is established. Most homes are HUD or FHA which are guaranteed. The only money that the banks get back is the difference between the firesale amount and the default amount of the note.

This was the policy before 1980. President Carter changed the law when the Democrats controlling the all of government pushed this through just before Carter left office.

It fundamentally changed real estate ownership and practice forever.

Thus Obama is more about pushing the same kind of failed idealism of President Carter who was the worst president in American History!

Anti-White Discrimination is clear, civil war is coming!

Anti-White Discrimination

Brazil Fashion Show Agrees to Black Model Quota, May 26, 2009, AFP
Designers will be fined if fashion show doesn’t have enough black models.

White Pride Is Uncool, May 21, 2009, Taki’s Magazine
Why white victims of racial preferences get no sympathy.

State GOP’s Problem? Too White, Too Male, May 19, 2009, Orange County Register
Non-white populations continue to grow, and they’ve stopped voting Republican.

Ex-Student Says NJ Medical School Discriminated, May 12, 2009, AP
White Americans born in Africa not allowed to call themselves African American.

Jim Crow Liberalism, May 11, 2009, buchanan.org
Race discrimination endures in America—against whites.

Jefferson Parish Black Teachers’ Group Opposes White Gretna Principal, May 7, 2009, Times-Picayune
Only a black principal can “reflect school and parish demographics.”

Reverse Discrimination Suits Flourish, April 29, 2009, AP
“Quotas do not end discrimination. They are discrimination.”

Reverse-Discrimination Case Splits Supreme Court, April 23, 2009, Christian Science Monitor
New Haven: All test results were thrown out so there was no discrimination.

Goode Talks on Campus Tonight, April 22, 2009, Daily Tar Heel (University of North Carolina)
UNC: Another former congressman, another protest.

Valley Woman Files ‘Reverse Discrimination’ Lawsuit, April 21, 2009, KGBT-TV (Harlingen, Texas)
Staff spoke Spanish to non-Spanish-speaking residents and staff.

Justices to Hear White Firefighters’ Bias Claims, April 10, 2009, New York Times
Very significant case to be argued April 22.

SC College Sued for Discriminating against Whites, April 10, 2009, AP
EEOC says black college “engaged in unlawful practices” against 3 white profs.

Osceola County Moves to Diversify Its Business Partners, April 2, 2009, Orlando Sentinel
Hispanic county commissioner wants county to get federal “diversity” money.

Foundations Oppose Call to Target Grants, March 24, 2009, Wall Street Journal
Resist quotas for “minorities, the poor, and other disadvantaged groups.”

A Leadership of Cowards?, March 17, 2009, National Review Online
Why is Eric Holder embarrassed about enforcing civil rights in Noxubee County?

Chicago Settles Reverse Discrimination Lawsuit, March 13, 2009, AP
Supreme Court says test was fair and whites were discriminated against.

Holder: Keep Voting Rights Act Restrictions, March 10, 2009, NewsMax
Keeping federal approval of South’s election laws “is just as important as fighting foreign wars.”

Will Anyone Lower the Boom on the Virginia State Bar?, March 5, 2009, Discriminations
A state bar’s commitment to diversity legally suspect.

White Firefighter to Get a Trial on Bias Claim, February 20, 2009, Seattle Times
White fireman got highest score on promotion test, but black fireman got promoted.

UPS Promotes Diversity in NASCAR Through $75,000 in Scholarships, February 13, 2009, Earthtimes.org (Press Release)
“UPS’s commitment to diversity extends to everything we do.”

Black Caucus Rejects Membership of White, February 11, 2009, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette (Fayetteville)
Arkansas Black Caucus: Not all forms of racial discrimination are bad.

Calling All (But Only) Non-White Lawyers, February 9, 2009,
New York State Bar yet to enter “post-racial age of Obama.”

Less Immigration Slows Asian, Hispanic Growth

Less Immigration Slows Asian, Hispanic Growth

More news stories on Signs of Hope

AP, May 14, 2009

Deterred by immigration laws and the lackluster economy, the population growth of Hispanics and Asians in the U.S. has slowed unexpectedly, causing the government to push back estimates on when minorities will become the majority by as much as a decade.

Census data released Thursday also showed that fewer Hispanics were migrating to suburbs and newly emerging immigrant areas in the Southeast, including Arkansas, Tennessee and Georgia, staying put instead in traditional gateway locations such as California.

The nation’s overall minority population continues to rise steadily, adding 2.3 percent in 2008 to 104.6 million, or 34 percent of the total population. But the slowdown among Hispanics and Asians continues to shift conventional notions on when the tipping point in U.S. diversity will come—estimated to occur more than three decades from now. Black growth rates remain somewhat flat.

Thirty-six states had lower Hispanic growth in 2008 compared with the year before. The declines were in places where the housing bubble burst, such as Nevada and Arizona, which lost construction jobs that tend to attract immigrants.

Decreases seen in the Southeast

Other decreases were seen in new immigrant destinations in the Southeast, previously seen as offering good manufacturing jobs in lower-cost cities compared to the pricier Northeast. In contrast, cities in California, Illinois and New Jersey showed gains.

In Arkansas, manufacturing and poultry companies have cut hours and workers, leaving a growing number of Hispanics unable to cover their mortgage payments, said Maribel Tapia, a housing counselor in Fayetteville, Ark. Fathers are moving out of state, where other relatives have lines on menial jobs that support the families they leave behind, she said. Police in northwest Arkansas created an immigration task force with the help of U.S. immigration agents.

{snip}

The political effects can be high. Minorities turned out in record numbers last November to vote, largely for Democrat Barack Obama, and Hispanic groups are now flexing their growing clout in future elections as they push immigration reform.

More than a dozen states also stand to gain or lose House seats after the 2010 census depending on last-minute shifts in population.

People are staying put

{snip}

The Census Bureau projected last August that white children will become the minority in 2023 and the overall white population will follow in 2042. The agency now says it will recalculate those figures, typically updated every three to four years, because they don’t fully take into account anti-immigration policies after the September 2001 terror attacks and the current economic crisis.

The new projections, expected to be released later this year, could delay the tipping point for minorities by 10 years, given the current low rates of immigration, David Waddington, the Census Bureau’s chief of projections, said in a telephone interview.

{snip}

According to the latest data, the percentage growth of Hispanics slowed from 4.0 percent in 2001 to 3.2 percent last year; their slowed population growth would have been greater if it weren’t for their high fertility—nearly 10 births for every death.

Fastest-growing minority groups

Asians also slowed their population increases from 3.7 percent in 2001 to about 2.5 percent. Hispanics and Asians still are the two fastest-growing minority groups, making up about 15 percent and 4.4 percent of the U.S. population, respectively.

Blacks, who compose about 12.2 percent of the population, have increased at a rate of about 1 percent each year. Whites, with a median age of 41, have increased very little in recent years due to low birth rates and an aging boomer population.

{snip}

Six U.S. counties saw their minority populations become the majority, including Orange County, Fla., the nation’s 35th most populous county that is home to Orlando. Webster County in Georgia was majority-minority in 2007 but reverted back to white majority in 2008.

In all, about 309 of the nation’s 3,142 counties, or one in 10, have minority populations greater than 50 percent. Other counties that become majority-minority in 2008 were Stanislaus in California; Finney in Kansas; Warren in Mississippi; and Edwards and Schleicher counties in Texas.

Top 10 in Texas

Other findings:

* There are 48 majority Hispanic counties nationally; the top 10 were all in Texas. The gateway cities of Los Angeles, New York, Miami, Houston and Chicago had the greatest number of Hispanics.

* Seventy-seven counties are majority-black; all were in the South. Atlanta edged past Chicago in the number of blacks, ranking second after New York City. They were followed by Washington and Philadelphia.

* Honolulu County, Hawaii, was the only majority Asian county in the nation. New York City had the highest population of Asians, surpassing Los Angeles. Asians also numbered the most in San Francisco; San Jose, Calif.; and Chicago.

* California, the nation’s most populous state, also had the most number of whites. Maine and Vermont had the highest share of whites at 95 percent each.

In Nashville, Tenn., Maria Lopez, a 49-year-old Mexican immigrant, said business is down 80 percent at the restaurant she runs, and 10 to 15 people come in a day asking for jobs, mostly Hispanics.

Lopez said she had to cut back on the amount of money she was sending back home to her family in Mexico. Although she’s been in the U.S. for 13 years, she is thinking about returning to Mexico.

{snip}

Original article

(Posted on May 14, 2009)


Comments

This refutes the conventional wisdom that the takeover of the US by minorities is “inevitable.”

If a bad economy and Bush’s half-hearted attempts to enforce immigration laws can have such a big impact, imagine what would happen if we truly rolled up our sleeves, closed the border, declared a moratorium on all non-essential legal immigration, and cracked down on those employing & sheltering illegal aliens!

Posted by Paul at 5:48 PM on May 14


This minority-majority propaganda is just psychological warfare against whites to convince them to give up against the ‘inevitable.’ Yes, the ‘inevitability’ factor in Marxist theories crop up again here. This article states flat out the last projection didn’t take into account post-9/11 immigration policies or the currecnt recession.

The current projections also do not take into account ANY events that could transpire in the next 30 years. Such events could include: further terrorist attacks that unite patriotic Americans, immigrants being lured away by China or India, ethnic conflict within the United States, a tax revolt by whites, the U.S. military revolting against the rest of government, etc. Non-white immigration will stop when the freebies come to an end. And that will be long before they gain majority status.

One thing I think is certain; non-whites WILL NEVER takeover a functioning, first world United States. If they do become a majority, it will be in a country that is in ruins to which whites will have no loyalty. Whites will fight again when all pretense of legitimacy in government disappears.

Posted by Civilized Neighbor at 6:46 PM on May 14


The “government” pushed back about a decade when minorities would become majorities?

Well, why didn’t they factor in this possibility when they projected their demographs originally? I mean, if they’re going to issue demographic stats 40 years into the future, can’t they at least factor in variables and report them at the same time they gleefully release their projections when whites will be a minority?

Too, why is it we never get any projections on other things? Is it because a portion of the government that releases these figures are part of a cabal of mentally disturbed ideologues who want to see a conglomeration of different races, because it satisfies some sick obsession they have that has to do with multiculturalism? (Over the objection of a majority of the people in this country too, incidentally, including many non-whites.)

Well, I think considerable pressure needs to be brought to bear on these federal demographers to include numerous foot notes and disclaimers regarding their figures to better inform all of us. For example, there’s a very good chance Mexico will fall to the drug lords, and the US will be involved in a war with Mexico. Will that be a plus or minus regarding mestizos?

Too, there’s even a greater chance that we will literally collapse economically and states will either secede from the union or racial/political civil war will occur.

And, there are other VERY real possibilities that can occur which will effect the racial make-up of the population 40 years from now, one of which could be food and water wars, severe drought and the like.

The one certain way for these reports to stop coming out by the feds is if they see an unavoidable situation coming which will cause a sharp reduction in mestizos and a rise to 76% by the white population, with the promise of slight future increases.
Not one word will be printed about what kind of racial makeup we will likely see in 40 years.

Posted by ranger at 7:42 PM on May 14


“Deterred by immigration laws and the lackluster economy, the population growth of Hispanics and Asians in the U.S. has slowed unexpectedly, causing the government to push back estimates on when minorities will become the majority by as much as a decade”

Good, but we need whites to wake up and halt further legal 3rd world immigration, demand enforcement of our employment laws to send the illegal packing, get rid of the h1b visa programs and get our country back. It’s not too late.

Posted by Anonymous at 8:02 PM on May 14


“The nation’s overall minority population continues to rise steadily, adding 2.3 percent in 2008 to 104.6 million, or 34 percent of the total population. But the slowdown among Hispanics and Asians continues to shift conventional notions on when the tipping point in U.S. diversity will come—estimated to occur more than three decades from now.”

What an odd turn of phrase, “the tipping point in U.S. diversity.”

Why not the “enrichment point,” or better still, the “utopia point,” of U.S. diversity?

How is it that the “glorious” future of a nonwhite majority USA, has such a strange angst about its “inevitable” establishment, that can make even some unnamed “reporters” at the dogmatically multicultural AP engage in such a journalistic faux pas? I mean, it is not as if some army of space aliens or zombies is about to dominate our country, it is only undocumented migrants and H1-B tech-virtuosos who will bring about this, “tipping point in U.S. diversity,” right?

Or did I miss something?

As always, God help us all!

Posted by John PM at 8:15 PM on May 14


“The Census Bureau projected last August that white children will become the minority in 2023 and the overall white population will follow in 2042. The agency now says it will recalculate those figures, typically updated every three to four years, because they don’t fully take into account anti-immigration policies after the September 2001 terror attacks and the current economic crisis.”

This article is misleading. Many of us know that there are alot of groups encompassing the Census Bureau’s non-hispanic White category that are not European in origin. European-Americans are 60% of the population and will be a minority in the next 20 years, not by 2042.

Posted by Anonymous at 8:29 PM on May 14


FINALLY some good news on the immigration front for a change!

Posted by Anonymous at 10:56 PM on May 14


Deterred by immigration laws and the lackluster economy, the population growth of Hispanics and Asians in the U.S. has slowed

LIARS…LIARS….LIARS…the government is simply telling us White taxpaying slaves what we want to hear so we will keep rowing the Titanic we call the U.S.A. The ICEBERG is chasing us.

Posted by SKIP at 12:37 AM on May 15


But wait! I thought they were coming here because they wanted to breathe the free air of America and to revel in the thrill of all that is being an American!

You mean they only wanted the money? You mean their immigration is only about economics? But it doesn’t matter! Because only an American wants to make money! Why greed is a staple of the American character, unique amongst all the peoples of the world!

Posted by Alan at 1:11 AM on May 15


The economic situation of the US will unfortunately continue to deteriorate due to too many asians, hispanics and blacks. It is the Whites who built America and made it great, if immigration and multi-culturalism were good for the US, the US would be booming. America will eventually need to bring in tougher immigration laws as the country slids deeper into debt and chaos.

“The whites makes it and the asian, hispanic and black men destroy it, rob it, cheat it and third world it”.

Annoymous is at it again……”This article is misleading. Many of us know that there are alot of groups encompassing the Census Bureau’s non-hispanic White category that are not European in origin”.

This half baked statement makes no sense at all. ‘Who are these non-hispanic white groups that are not European in origin?’ Check the definition of the word ‘white’, you intellectually challenged dynamo.

Posted by Nicholas Folkes at 8:14 AM on May 15


Ranger raises the the issue of the interaction of post-1965 immigration policy and ecology. It is a mighty serious issue that is hardly ever discussed. Those of you who think you can run off to a “your own private Idaho” somewhere in America-as Chronicles writer Sean Scallon does-are completely delusional. Allow the post-1965 non-white population to exponentially explode and they will destroy the life sustaining ecocosystems write up to the border of your “own private Idaho” somewhere in Wisconsin. These White private Idahos are not long term viable….especially if you let China and India’s borders extend deep into the American Heartland.

Whe we speak to or fellow Native Born White Americans about post-1965 immigration policy we need to combine both the race-replacement issue with the ecology-issue. It will grab White people more powerfully in the gut. The two issues really are inseparable. Ask our fellow White Americans how many amenities they are willing togive uo to accomdate a rapidly growing asian and muslim population. Amenities such as the bucolic country drive on a Sunday afternoon, weekend getaways to the Adirondacks. The waiting list to get into Yellowstone during the summer time is alreay quite long.

I beleive it is quite possible to repell the invasion and restore White Americans to 90 percent of the American population…as soon as a critical numeber of White Americans get over the denial phase..the revolt will be total.

Posted by Jupiter at 8:42 AM on May 15


This article is misleading. Many of us know that there are alot of groups encompassing the Census Bureau’s non-hispanic White category that are not European in origin. European-Americans are 60% of the population and will be a minority in the next 20 years, not by 2042.

Posted by Anonymous at 8:29 PM on May 14

Oh, I bet it will be much sooner than that.

Posted by Anonymous at 9:47 AM on May 15


Is there any organization or group that is asking for the repeal of the law on automatic citizenship for any baby whose mother can step over the border and give birth moments later? If so, I’d like to know and add my voice. I think this would be the biggest deterrent to illegal immigration. That first, then E-Verify mandated for all businesses, and a crackdown of benefits.
We are known around the world as the biggest patsy of all. If you can get to the US, you’ve got it made from birth to death. This is because it is so profitable to our elected representatives, greedy businesses and anti-American groups. Let’s stand up for ourselves for a change. I just read an article this morning about the ” US Hispanic C or C.” Are caucasians allowed? Can you hear the uproar of the regular C of C changed to “The Caucasian Chamber of Commerce.” That’s just one small way in which we have bowed to a onslaught of poor, uneducated criminals and their supporters. Mr. President, you are fond of saying, “we can do anything.” Prove it. Rid the country of illegal aliens and put a moratorium on all immigration until we straighten out this mess our leaders have caused.

Posted by June at 10:37 AM on May 15


For those who may be wondering about the author of this article, her name is Hope Yen (sounds Chinese).
I love how she says that “Minorities turned out in record numbers last November to vote, largely for Democrat Barack Obama.” This is what the left wants, more minorities -especially hispanics- who will be unable to provide for themselves and their families w/o government assistance in the form of things like foodstamps, WIC, substidized housing and head start. More money from the pockets of white taxpayers who are forced to substidize their own displacement by third-worlders. California is broke in no small part because incompetent tax-consumers are causing competent tax-payers to flee the state. An immigration slowdown maybe be good, but only an end to this horrendous immigration onslaught would warrant poping open the champagne and celebrating.

Posted by Anonymous at 4:32 PM on May 15


“Annoymous is at it again……”This article is misleading. Many of us know that there are alot of groups encompassing the Census Bureau’s non-hispanic White category that are not European in origin”.

This half baked statement makes no sense at all. ‘Who are these non-hispanic white groups that are not European in origin?’ Check the definition of the word ‘white’, you intellectually challenged dynamo.

Posted by Nicholas Folkes at 8:14 AM on May 15”

It makes sense to those of us that are really White or should I say Europid?

From the Census Bureau:
White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as “White” or report entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Near Easterner, Arab, or Polish.

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI125207.htm

Posted by Anonymous at 5:05 PM on May 15


I read on another blog today that the governor of California was disturbed by the drop in taxes being collected. Maybe he should figure out how to collect it from all those illegals California was and is so eager to have? This is what happens when you force hardworking producers to leave your state and replace them with two or three non tax paying illegals for each of the productive individuals who left, Illegals who drain the system, not add to it? The next move will be to ask all other states to chip in to pay for California’s Foolish Decisions?

Posted by T Rexx at 5:21 PM on May 15


The main problem is our corrupt congress and our president both the Left and the Right. The Left worships multiculturalism and left leaning congress members want the mexican vote, the Right is in with big business who wants the cheap mexican labor. Together both Left and Right are in bed. Special interest groups and lobbyists run this country, not the people. Frankly, in my opinion, most of congress needs to be kicked out, lobbying where money is given needs to be done away with and we need term limits. Since immigration is so important, we need a national referendum on the issue after everyone is given ALL of the facts and costs, with crime etc.

Posted by Anonymous at 8:29 PM on May 15


“Annoymous is at it again……”This article is misleading. Many of us know that there are alot of groups encompassing the Census Bureau’s non-hispanic White category that are not European in origin”.

This half baked statement makes no sense at all. ‘Who are these non-hispanic white groups that are not European in origin?’ Check the definition of the word ‘white’, you intellectually challenged dynamo.”

Intellectually challenged? What is Annoymous (anonymous?) up to again and which anonymous has repeated the same offense you’ve pointed out since there are so many of them on here? Half-baked means crazy, foolish, totally unsound, a crazy scheme, a screwball proposal without a prayer of working. How is pointing out a well known fact that the government counts non-Whites as White fit into this definition?

Incidentally, I ran your name through a database that lists surnames of people of non-White ancestry but didn’t come up with any hits. Are you using a ghost name?

Posted by Anonymous at 8:36 AM on May 16


“White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as “White” or report entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Near Easterner, Arab, or Polish”……..you are really mixed up anonymous.

If you knew anything about history and culture you would realise that white people came from the middle east. We had to wait until 5,000 years ago for the ice sheets to melt in Europe so colonisation and immigration were possible. White people ruled the Eurasian Steppe from North-West China all the way to the Atlantic, to be white you need to have Indo-European genetics which are found in many ancient civilisation in Europe, the Middles East and Asia becuase the whites were and are the torch bearers of culture. Many cultures and people have come and gone; the Tocharian Celts ruled the Tarim Basin in China and took civilisation to China when the Han Chinese were still hanging out in rice paddies. The Normans invaded England, Malta, Sicily, parts of coastal Italy and Lebanon and left their genetics in the local populations. This explains the Indo-European DNA in the arab gene pool. Don’t forget that other Indo-European tribes; the Hittites, Philistines, Alans, Scythians, Ionians, Romans, Sarmatians also left their intelligence amongst the barbaric tribes of North Africa and Asia.

Posted by Nicholas Folkes at 9:39 AM on May 16


“The next move will be to ask all other states to chip in to pay for California’s Foolish Decisions?”

This has already happened. California wants a 6 billion dollar bailout from the federal governement. I don’t think this should be allowed. California should have to live with its’ policies and the same goes for any other state. No federal bailouts.

Posted by Anonymous at 3:38 PM on May 16


If you knew anything about history and culture you would realise that white people came from the middle east. We had to wait until 5,000 years ago for the ice sheets to melt in Europe so colonisation and immigration were possible.

80-90% of European DNA is from people who weathered the last ice age in Europe. They were already living in Europe 20 thousand years ago. They drove the Neanderthals to extinction. The other 10-20% is from Near Easterners who moved into Europe and brought agriculture with them.

Posted by Alan at 4:03 PM on May 16

State GOP’s Problem? Too White, Too Male

State GOP’s Problem? Too White, Too Male

More news stories on Anti-White Discrimination

Total Buzz, Orange County Register, May 14, 2009

Allan Hoffenblum gave a roomful of mostly Republicans a hard look in the mirror at the Balboa Bay Club today. The major cause of the continued deterioration of the GOP in California is that it has done little to attract minorities, women and youth.

“It’s become a white man’s party,” he said at the Newport Beach luncheon.

{snip}

“The Latino and Asian populations continue to grow, and they’ve stopped voting Republican,” said Hoffenblum, former political director for the state GOP and now an elections handicapper.

Among the state’s white, non-Hispanic voters, 40 percent are Democrat and 42 percent are Republican. Among Latinos, 57 percent Democrat and 19 percent Republican. Among Asians, 30 percent Democrat and 29 percent Republican (and a whopping 39 percent independent).

{snip}

Among the state’s 33 Democratic members of Congress, 54 percent are women. Five are Latino and three are black. Just nine are white, non-Hispanic men.

Among the state’s 19 Republican members of Congress, there are 18 white males and Mary Bono. Hoffenblum ran down similar ratios in the state Legislature.

“When it comes to Latinos, I think it’s because of the shrillness of the debate on illegal immigration,” he said for that minority’s reluctance to join the Grand Ole Party. “It’s not the message—it’s how it’s delivered. Latinos and younger voters think we don’t like them.”

{snip}

Original article

(Posted on May 19, 2009)


Comments are worth reading!

the real problem is that the Republican party of George W. Bush doesnt have the interests of the white man, so why join a sinking ship?

Posted by Anonymous at 5:54 PM on May 19


Correction, the Latino and Asian minorities NEVER voted Republican. It has been the Republicans who have foresaken their
natural base of white Christians. George Bush couldn’t schmooz enough with the Mexican Kleptocrats and couldn’t invite enough
Hispanics to partake of welfare and free education and medical care. Who needs “Republicans” if they are no different from the
Democrats.

Posted by Tim at 6:06 PM on May 19


“Non-white populations continue to grow, and they’ve stopped voting Republican.”

I’ve written this many times, but it bears repeating. The greatest incindiary bomb we have in this country, behind the economy, is the population explosion.

The least little event that occurs, whether it’s a drought or a manmade disaster, is going to seriously affect food and water.

And, it is the big bonus takers, the self-described hotshot corporate types who push for economic growth, rather than self-sufficient sanity, because of their past and present desire to satisfy their insatiable greed.

It’s a big come uppence for them to have to endure the loss of incoming revenue, as well as being now thought of as the instigators of our present depression.

Now, they hold a status below used car salesman and politician, and it’s a common sight to see one of them taken away in handcuffs.

Posted by ice at 6:29 PM on May 19


It doesn’t matter who whites vote for, because the government discriminates against Whites:
Under the guise of protecting racial minorities, government laws, programs, and practices discriminate against white Americans: in hiring and promotion, in access to loans for business and housing, in college admission and scholarships, and in numerous other ways that affect livelihoods of Whites. Showing favoritism to any individual due to race is not only incongruous, but harmful… true equality may only be achieved by merit, and intellectual capacity

Posted by Mark Fleagle at 6:32 PM on May 19


Imagine if the GOP actually embraced its white male identity. They might actually win another election.

Posted by Fil ibn Yafeth at 6:43 PM on May 19


“‘It’s become a white man’s party,’ he said at the Newport Beach luncheon.”

Nope, not quite right there at all Comrade Hoffenblum.

The more accurate quote would be: ‘It’s become a white man’s party, far too late in the game to matter in California anymore!’

As always, God help us all!!!

Posted by John PM at 6:54 PM on May 19


One of the “too White, too male” members of the audience should have done what I have done in similar situations: Agree, and say that to increase Republican Diversity, your policy will be to not vote for any Republican candidate.

I didn’t do it to Republican reps, but I have done it to salesmen for companies that brag about their Diversity, such as Ford, Verizon, and GM. I told them that while I liked their product, I would not consider its purchase because I wanted to help the company become more Diverse. “Diversity”, I said. “must include the consumers, not just the producers”.

Posted by Nativist-American at 6:54 PM on May 19


When Reagan took a hard line against Castro, the Cuban exile community feel in love with Reagan and the GOP. On this, the GOP ‘Hispanic strategy’ was born.

Of course, the Miami Cubans were a small slice of the hispanic pie but the GOP extrapolated countless votes from ‘conservative’ hispanics (a true minority) based on this one group and their anti-Castro hate.

The GOP was lied to and they fooled themselves into believing hispanics were an untapped gold mine of conservative voters. I still don’t believe they want to give up that dream.

The GOP no longer talk about attracting the conservative hispanic vote (as I said, a true minority), but now talk about getting the hispanic vote by being ‘inclusive’.

The dream and self-delusion lives on.

Posted by sbuffalonative at 7:06 PM on May 19


The Republican Party are so afraid of the word, racist, that they have sold out a long time ago. John McCain and Michael Steele is proof of that. The Republican Party has no use for Whites, only for their votes and money, period. Notice how Rush, Hannity, Levin, Billy Cunningham, etc. hate to mention the hard facts of race and if race comes up how they pander to their black callers and give them plenty of air time? But let a White speak out some truths and they are quickly disconnected and ridiculed and labeled a racist, nazi, etc….

Posted by Anonymous at 7:27 PM on May 19


The Republicans are just Democrat-lite (and not even that light). If the Republicans would focus on what is good for the USA (which incidentally is also what is good for whites and non-whites alike) they might just pick up a vote or two. And who wants to vote for a party that is self-deprecating? Can you imagine the Democrats saying that Detroit Democrats were too black and too female?

Posted by Istvan at 7:45 PM on May 19


“It’s become a white man’s party,” he said at the Newport Beach luncheon.

How typical of the Golden State GOP, compulsively disparaging their most consistently loyal voting base: white men.

But don’t worry, Hoffenblum: this white man has left the California GOP, never ever to return, and I’m confident that there’re many thousands more like me to follow. Soon you and your opportunistic party hack buddies can have a No Man’s Party in California to whine about, if there’s still anyone around here that knows enough English to understand you.

Posted by Zorba_the_Geek at 8:20 PM on May 19


“The Latino and Asian populations continue to grow, and they’ve stopped voting Republican,” said Hoffenblum, former political director for the state GOP and now an elections handicapper.

They never voted Republican to begin with! What is he talking about.

Posted by Economist at 8:32 PM on May 19


“None white populations continue to grow and they’ve stopped voting Republican”

A sign of what is to come throughout the U.S. as so many posters here have pointed out. As long ago as Plato, it was feared that the weakness involved in democracy, as a political system, representative or otherwise, is that, the “common rabble”,(this is how is is often described) will vote for whoever gives them more of the States riches. California is an example.

Posted by Bobby at 8:59 PM on May 19


California Republicans obsessively whore after the hispanic vote, spending big bucks and tons of time pandering, all to little avail.

The problem isn’t the “shrillness” of immigration alone (by the way, “shrillness” in an article like this means “we should enforce our laws” and “reasonable” means “we should not have a border and pay for everything illegals want”), it’s the spending-union-race axis that dominates minority votes in CA.

If you want to hear real shrillness, read a translated transcript of what CA Mexican politicians say to spanish language outlets like Univision or La Opinion.

Posted by Ryan Chaserian at 9:04 PM on May 19


Did non-whites ever vote Republican? The real issue there is there are just more non-whites now. It will be interesting unfolding disaster to watch the non-whites fight for what’s left of our legacy.

Posted by Dead in Denver at 9:13 PM on May 19


…..” true equality may only be achieved by merit, and intellectual capacity”
Posted by Mark Fleagle at 6:32 PM on May 19
This is a nice sounding phrase, but an impossibility – an oxymoron because merit and intellectual capacity is never equally endowed.

Posted by Whiteplight at 10:14 PM on May 19


>>>Too White, Too Male

The same point could be made in several different ways.

Perhaps the nation (or the voting populace) is “too black” and “too female.”

Maybe blacks and females are too enamored of socialism, abortion on demand, and wild-eyed political demagoguery such as we find in the current rulers.

Posted by Anonymous at 11:12 PM on May 19


Here’s hoping Allan Hoffenblum gets to experience the joys of multiculturism by sharing a jail cell with some bi-sexual Pacific Islander gang banger!

There really is not much using trying to debate the likes of Allan Hoffenblum – he is what he is.

He should just not feel to safe and secure in thinking that he will always live in a safe, rich White world.

Posted by organizedactivist at 11:52 PM on May 19


What happened to white superiority? Why are white men losing? Esplain por favor.

Posted by Black Insurgent at 12:17 AM on May 20


It’s true that the vast majority of Republicans are white. But rather than realize that the solution to their shrinking share of the population is to stop flooding the country with non-white immigrants, the Stupid Party has come to the conclusion that they have to join the Democrats in wanting to keep increasing immigration, giving amnesty to illegal immigrants, and favoring affirmative action, all in a fruitless effort to gain the votes of non-whites. Face it, given a choice, the non-whites will always vote for the true anti-white party, the Democrats.

It would also be a good idea to not favor a totally unnecessary war just because an idiot Republican started it.

Posted by WR the elder at 1:33 AM on May 20


“Did non-whites ever vote Republican?” Yes, Mr. Denver. In the period following the civil war, blacks supported the party of Lincoln. However, when FDR created the modern welfare state of America, blacks switched to supporting the Democrats.

Of course, that was not really a switch at all: they consistently voted for whoever promised them the biggest chunk of the white man’s pie, as do all other non-whites. As will they ever. Self-interest is natural law, and race matters.

This weak, sniveling: “What can we do to get them to like us?” trend is as disgusting for its weakness as for its ignorance. They never did, they never will. Nature’s rules.

The line: “It’s become a white man’s party” is not an accurate assessment, because it suggests an increase in white involvement, and/or an increase in the concern for white people on the part of the party, neither of which is true. This is in no small part because of whites who abandon the party rather than fight for their own interest.

Both major parties were very white through most of their history. This reflected the population as a whole. Until very recently, thanks to the Kennedy (D!!) immigration reform act of ‘65.

It would be more accurate to say that “It’s become the last refuge of the white man in American politics. It is the last remaining place where the white man may have a significant voice. ” This is changing, too, as disappointed whites abandon ship (rather than take the wheel) and allow those with the same program of pandering to non-whites to take control. It is being targeted, and those who should fight are fleeing.

I can’t believe the number of times I’ve heard the sentiment: “To hell with the Republicans, because they aren’t paying enough attention to the concerns of white people. They’ve sold us out!” Gee, why doesn’t the party leadership pay more attention to these “supporters”? And just who do these steadfast defenders of the white race think WILL do more for us? Or at the least, do less harm, giving us greater chances to get the country moving in the right direction- Obama? The party of Ted Kennedy?
As Dr. Phil might say: “How’s that working for ya?”

The Democrats have clearly gone way beyond rejecting representing whites, to oppressing and dispossessing them in favor of any & every-body else. They are the champion sell-outs! And they have been so for a long time. This article is really about how the Republican party is under pressure to do the same, and there are indications that it is sitting on the fence. It is up to white people themselves to see to it that the GOP comes down on their side.
Again: nature’s rules. No one else will, and the party itself is a merely a political beast: it must be tamed, trained and put to work. Whoever will sit on his hands has no right to complain about what they will be full of.

Posted by Wyvern at 2:42 AM on May 20

Britain’s bankers plumb new depths – Jon Moulton, the private equity chief, warned a City lunch this week that he feared serious civil unrest. There was, he said, a 25 per cent chance of one of the 15 member countries of the eurozone pulling out of the currency club. That, he said, would be a catastrophic shock leading to a “far greater financial crisis” than the current one.

Britain’s bankers plumb new depths

Jon Moulton, the private equity chief, warned a City lunch this week that he feared serious civil unrest. There was, he said, a 25 per cent chance of one of the 15 member countries of the eurozone pulling out of the currency club. That, he said, would be a catastrophic shock leading to a “far greater financial crisis” than the current one.

The mind boggles at a financial crisis far worse than the current one. Is such a thing possible? Even with this one, it may already be too late to prevent social unrest, especially in Britain, which is tipped to be one of the worst-hit countries economically.

The spectacle of bankers continuing to award themselves bonuses while taking taxpayer support is feeding an extraordinary public rage and a fierce sense of injustice. With 40,000 people losing their jobs each month, it is a recipe for trouble, come the traditional rioting months of the summer.

It won’t be bankers being lynched, of course, but small shopkeepers in inner-city areas having their windows smashed and their stock looted. The only surprise is there haven’t already been antibanker demonstrations in Threadneedle Street – secretly cheered on by 99 per cent of Middle England.

The seething sense of unfairness is almost palpable. The view that a small elite not only caused the crisis, but continues to profit at the expense of everyone else, is near universal. Gordon Brown’s promise of no rewards for failure in state-supported banks is looking ever more threadbare. We now know that Peter Cummings, the highest-paid person on the HBOS board, headed a division responsible for £7 billion of losses last year, yet he was still given a reported £660,000 payoff when he left in early January clutching his £6 million pension pot.

The suggestion by Lord Myners, the City minister, that some bankers simply have no sense of the broader society around them is getting harder to refute. To be preparing to pay out billions of pounds in discretionary bonuses over the next few weeks suggests an ignorance of the public mood and a single-mindedness bordering on sociopathic.

All this may be a bit of a side show for Sir Victor Blank and Eric Daniels, chairman and chief executive, respectively, as they try to stop the water slopping over the gunwales of the combined Lloyds/HBOS. Yesterday’s bombshell was grave for the bank, dispiriting for taxpayers and damaging to the chief executive. The timing is acutely awkward, coming just 48 hours after he appeared before the Commons Treasury Select Committee. MPs might have pressed him rather harder if they had known what was just around the corner.

The £10 billion loss at HBOS is humiliating enough, but the admission that the losses are £1.6 billion worse than when shareholders were asked to approve the deal in November is worse. Lloyds got HBOS to sweeten the terms twice. With hindsight it still wasn’t enough. Mr Daniels admitted to Parliament this week that he was not able to conduct as much due diligence as in a normal deal. His shareholders and UK taxpayers are now paying a heavy price for that failure.

The 32 per cent slump in the Lloyds share price yesterday speaks volumes about the market’s fears. Although Lloyds insists its balance sheet is still strong, the need for additional capital will be back on the agenda. If HBOS’s corporate loans could have soured by £1.6 billion in the space of just a month, its surplus capital cushion could quickly be wiped out. That could lead to full nationalisation eventually.

Lloyds says that one of the reasons for the losses was the more conservative methodology it uses for gauging potential loan losses. That comes close to suggesting the old HBOS board was somewhat less than conservative itself. If the reputation of the old guard at HBOS, including Gordon Brown’s former favourite Sir James Crosby, is capable of sinking any lower in the public estimation, it will now be doing so.

White Pride Is Uncool

White Pride Is Uncool

More news stories on Racial Identity

Steve Sailer, Taki’s Magazine, May 20, 2009

Following up on Jared Taylor’s article, the Ricci reverse discrimination lawsuit now before the Supreme Court is not one of those “hard cases” about which law students are warned. There is nothing anomalous about the discrimination against the New Haven firemen who had their top scores in the 2003 civil service exam thrown out by the city because no blacks scored high enough to get promotions. Employment decisions being rigged to prevent “disparate impact” on “protected minorities” is just business as usual in America since the 1970s.

Instead, what’s unusual is that we’re even hearing about the victimization of these unprotected majorities.

I suspect that’s largely because Frank Ricci and his friends are firemen. Fire fighters show up more than any other profession in prominent reverse discrimination suits, perhaps because they enjoy civil service protection, unions, and, most of all, public admiration.

In a culture that increasingly holds blue-collar workers in contempt, firemen are the exception to the rule. They risk their lives for you, and they don’t give you speeding tickets. As the cops in Joseph Wambaugh’s LAPD novels are always telling each other: If you really wanted people to like you, you should have been a fireman.

It’s worth exploring some of the more subtle game theory reasons why there is so little public outcry against discrimination against white males other than fire fighters. Why is Ricci close to being the exception that proves the rule?

First, affirmative action targets marginal white males.

For example, although white guys who are already firemen have a fighting chance of staving off unfair treatment in promotions, white guys who just want to become firemen are discriminated against in hiring with impunity. For example, a couple of years ago, the Bush Administration sued the New York fire department, which lost 343 men on 9/11, for discrimination because its entrance exam had a one standard deviation gap in its passing rate between whites and blacks, the same cognitive racial gap seen more or les everywhere.

The message the Bush Administration’s lawsuit was implicitly sending the FDNY was: “Hire more minorities and fewer whites. We don’t care how you do it. Just do it.”

Cheating an already employed white fireman out of a promotion is dicey because he doesn’t go away. He’s still a fireman. So he hangs around, he complains, he organizes other white firemen to complain to their aldermen about why the politicians aren’t releasing the results, maybe he talks his sister-in-law’s cousin who is a file clerk in Personnel into Xeroxing the secret results of the test and leak it to him. And then he hires a lawyer.

In contrast, cheating some random white guy off the street out of his lifelong dream of being a fireman is a piece of cake: “Don’t call us, we’ll call you.” What can this marginal man do about his suspicions? Not much. He’s not connected.

Moreover, announcing that you are a victim of affirmative action is to admit you are marginal, that you would have only barely made the cut anyway. How uncool is that?

Similarly, affirmative action, by definition, doesn’t impact those who made the cut. Consider Harvard students. While some freshmen may enter Harvard sore that affirmative action might have cost high school friends admission to Harvard, soon they have lots of swell new friends, who, unsurprisingly, are all Harvard students, unlike those losers they used to hang around with in high school who didn’t have what it takes to get into Harvard.

Hence, you don’t see a lot of solidarity in opposing affirmative action.

Moreover, as you go up the pyramid of power, quotas becomes less prevalent, as the elite decide to finally draw the line so that affirmative action least inconveniences them.

Reflect upon the career of the First Lady. Michelle Obama attended Whitney Young H.S., the most selective Chicago public high school, where blacks enjoyed a quota of 40 percent of admissions. Then she was off to Princeton and Harvard Law School. At each institution, she felt that white people were making fun of her because her test scores weren’t all that great. Still, like a lot of mediocre black law students, she wound up with a high-paying job at a prestigious law firm.

The New York Times reported on UCLA law professor Richard Sander’s study of affirmative action in legal hiring:

But most black associates were hired due to racial preferences. According to the New York Times, “Black students, who make up 1 to 2 percent of students with high grades (meaning a grade point average in the top half of the class) make up 8 percent of corporate law firm hires, Professor Sander found. ‘Blacks are far more likely to be working at large firms than are other new lawyers with similar credentials,’ he said.”

Then, however, colorblind reality intruded. Mrs. Obama apparently didn’t pass the rather easy Illinois bar exam on her first opportunity. Soon, she gave up her law license and took a less cognitively taxing job working for Mayor Daley as a political fixer.

Think about it from Mrs. Obama’s point of view. She’d been scraping by on affirmative action for years, but quotas mostly evaporate when it comes to making partner. The law firm’s partners can put up with employing subpar blacks as associates for a few years to stay out of trouble with the government, but they take the partnership hurdle seriously. The New York Times said: “But black lawyers, the study found, are about one-fourth as likely to make partner as white lawyers from the same entering class of associates.”

So, why kill herself in the likely hopeless task of making partner when she can go into Chicago politics, where she’ll be smarter than the average ward heeler? (As an example of the kind of mental firepower it takes to succeed in Cook County politics, former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich told a high school student named Mihan Lee, “I had an 18 on my ACT score. I’m told that’s kind of in the middle, maybe just below. [It’s around the 33rd percentile.] If I can be governor of Illinois, Mihan, you can be president of the United States.”)

So, the elites are less plagued by inept colleagues promoted due to racial preferences than their underlings are. Why, then, get annoyed by something that won’t much bother you personally?

Finally, the notion of white solidarity or white pride runs into the fundamental problem that whites mostly compete with each other for the best jobs. Competing with minorities is seen as evidence that you aren’t very far up the ladder.

Consider the three Cs: Creativity, Competence, and Charisma.

On the whole, whites tend to perform fairly well in terms of creativity, competence, and charisma, and thus tend to end up in the coolest jobs. In contrast, blacks are strongest at charisma and weakest at competence, while East Asians are the opposite. Mexican-Americans tend to be low in charisma and creativity (the proportion of famous Americans who are of Mexican descent is minimal), while perhaps moderate in competence.

Screenwriting is an example of a job that demands some high quantities of each category. Scripting movies is not the highest paid, most influential, most fun, or most desirable job in the country, but it comes close enough on all those dimensions to attract a huge number of would-be entrants.

Who wind up the screenwriters of Hollywood films? Although minorities buy a large fraction of movie tickets each weekend, 94 percent of employed screenwriters in 2004 were white.

Screenwriting is one of those jobs where, for a variety of reasons, affirmative action doesn’t much apply. (In a more rational world, the reverse would be true: we’d have racial quotas for screenwriters but not for fire captains. After all, whom do you rely upon to save your loved ones from flaming deaths? In a more sensible America, Frank Ricci would have his promotion but Akiva Goldsman would have gotten bumped off “Angels & Demons” for a handicapped Hispanic lesbian.)

Likewise, over 90 percent of the staff at the major New York magazines are white. (Heck, only two of the nine staffers have Spanish surnames at the Pew Hispanic Center.)

So, you don’t see a lot of Hollywood movies or glossy magazine articles about whites victimized by racial preferences. This just isn’t a problem they have to deal with.

Thus, promoting white solidarity sounds almost as implausible to white people trying to claw their way to the top as promoting Vertebrate Pride would seem: Sure, us vertebrates are definitely the coolest subphylum, but it’s kind of hard to get worked up over how all us vertebrates should stick together when the competition is just a bunch of invertebrates.

[Editor’s Note: Readers may wish also to read these related essays: The Limits of Race,” by Paul Gottfried;

A Reply to Takimag.com,” by Jared Taylor; and

Paul Gottfried Replies to His Critics,” by Paul Gottfried.]

Original article

(Posted on May 21, 2009)


Comments

oops. It was Steve Sailer who wrote this. My mistake.

Posted by Sleep at 6:19 PM on May 21


We need a writers contest with the subject being titled:
It is an Honor and Privilege to be White because:

I will put up $1000.

Posted by Kulaks never learn at 6:38 PM on May 21


Taki Theodoracopulous is being rather pompous here. Are we only allowed to be against AA because it affect firefighters? Are we supposed to kick so-called “marginal whites” to the curb? The hard fact of the matter is that “marginal whites” are probably brighter than 90% of blacks. And I would take a “marginal white” before a marginal black. The marginal white is our people, the marginal black is not.

TT is not a WN, and isn’t much of a RR. I would classify him as an aracial paleocon. Why PJB just had to have him as editor of TAC is beyond me. Then again, there’s the whole PJB and Ezola Foster fiasco, and PJB is more aracial paleocon than WN.

Posted by Question Diversity at 6:40 PM on May 21


“Similarly, affirmative action, by definition, doesn’t impact those who made the cut. Consider Harvard students. While some freshmen may enter Harvard sore that affirmative action might have cost high school friends admission to Harvard, soon they have lots of swell new friends, who, unsurprisingly, are all Harvard students, unlike those losers they used to hang around with in high school who didn’t have what it takes to get into Harvard.”

As is typical of Mr. Sailer, he assumes that every white person in the country is just like him, merely scratching at elitism and wishing for better. In undergrad, I went to the University of Michigan; I had no problem getting in there, but I did have high school friends who didn’t and should have been there except for affirmative action. You see, about 15% to 20% of my incoming “classmates” were nonwhites, that simply could barely form normal verbal utterances, let alone coherent written exercises requiring standard sentences and paragraphs.

Oh, of course, when their sub-mediocre work saw them with a generously granted C, they bellowed about “racism” and “discrimination” to any who cared to listen, and also to many (including myself) who didn’t. But that only solidified my contempt for them, not the white people who they had clearly cheated out of a rightful place in that university, including some of my friends from high school. This was because those whites (be they known to me or not,) would have at least put up a studiously dogged struggle to get a B the next time, and not hooted and chirped like feral baboons deprived of a cantaloupe they didn’t get, but felt entitled to for simply breathing and defecating regularly.

That is the point Mr. Sailer consistently misses, when he is discussing the racial spoils system-USA; for every glibly unconcerned white like him, there are probably at a minimum 5 to 10 who harbor the angst and anger that I do about the travesty of forced multicultural “equality.”

As always, God help us all!!!

Posted by John PM at 6:51 PM on May 21


Finally, the notion of white solidarity or white pride runs into the fundamental problem that whites mostly compete with each other for the best jobs.

I heartily agree! Not only that: White competitiveness is quite evident in white nationalism too. Whereas the average “diversity”-indoctrinated white person actively competes with his fellow whites in unctuous professions of officious commitment to non-discrimination, anti-racism, etc. (and we’ve all observed this in our daily lives), the white nationalists play the “more racialist than thou” game, trying to outdo one another in professed commitment to the preservation of the white race, which many of them define in ever narrower and more exclusive terms. It is no wonder that to many whites who might otherwise be interested in WN, “white pride” seems dour, unwelcoming and “uncool.”

Posted by Zorba_the_Geek at 6:52 PM on May 21


I want the most qualified person saving me from a burning building or operating on me or whatever. If that person is black, fine but if none are, also fine. ONLY qualifications should matter.

Posted by Anonymous at 7:49 PM on May 21


But what does this say about the morals and ethical principles of the legal profession?

They tout something called “the rule of law” but don’t apply it in this case.

Legislators in Congress take an oath to uphold “the Constitution and laws of the United States.” That means the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the 14th Amendment, which guarantees to all citizens “the equal protection of the law.” Hubert Humphrey who shepherded the Civil Rights Act through Congress said if there were anything in the law that allowed discrimination against whites he would eat it page by page. If he were alive today, he’d have indigestion.

But every time I’ve brought this matter to their attention, all I get is silence and avoidance. And contempt.

Posted by Frank Keliher at 8:09 PM on May 21


Steve Sailer:enough of the silly policy wonkishness. Enough of the social science jargon(game theory). White Nationalism is now the only game in town. It is the only political movement that can stop the race replacement of Native Born White Americans.
Native Born White Americans will either politically organize around race or face complete racial and economic dispossession at thehands of post-1965 hispanics,asians,muslims and africans.

“Marginal” White Males should be encouraged to politically organize race. It is one minute before for Native Born White Americans within the borders of America.

Posted by Jupiter at 8:28 PM on May 21


Moreover, announcing that you are a victim of affirmative action is to admit you are marginal, that you would have only barely made the cut anyway. How uncool is that?

Because we all know that “cool” and “uncool” are writ in stone, unchangeable for all time. And the media (and the elite discussed below) have no influence on, or interest in, what falls into which category. So “cool” and “uncool” are valid, objective, relevant categories in this context.

Similarly, affirmative action, by definition, doesn’t impact those who made the cut. Consider Harvard students. While some freshmen may enter Harvard sore that affirmative action might have cost high school friends admission to Harvard, soon they have lots of swell new friends, who, unsurprisingly, are all Harvard students, unlike those losers they used to hang around with in high school who didn’t have what it takes to get into Harvard.

Which explains why blacks don’t get bent out of shape about these things, either.

Steve’s my favorite blogger, but his babe in the woods routine vis-a-vis Leviathan (AKA the First Estate, AKA the media) is so old it’s wearing sans-a-belt pants.

Posted by Anonymous at 8:41 PM on May 21


Sailer can be very superficial. By the way, Jenniger Gratz didn’t hink it was uncool to sue over being denied a seat at the U Michigan law school. Remeber the second of the two Phil Donahue shows Jared Taylor appeared on. Remember the 40 year old White engineer who complained bitterly about being passed over for promotion. The promotion went to a 25 year old off the boat hindu LEGAL immigrant. Go read the transcript of the second show that Jared appeared on. Was this guy being uncool Steve?

Steve Sailer:”marginal” Native Born White American Males should be encouraged to revolt against thier race replacement at the hands of post-1965 hispanics,muslims,africans …and asians-the LEGAL immigrant group that you are very fond of.

Posted by Jupiter at 9:14 PM on May 21


Sailor makes a very good point that the higher one goes up the pole (the more one would be able to do something about it), the less reasons one has to be disgruntled, or even notice what’s going on at all. Also they have to lose if they were to notice, it’s not cool being pro-white. ‘Minorities’, however, have their own reasons for not noticing and maintaining silence. They also maintain sympathy with, at all times, and act for the benefit of their fellow proletariat they may not even know. They understand them, sure, the lowest are now the cultural leaders, but they do not always know them. They maintain absolute solidarity with those gleefully tormenting and discriminating against whites at any opportunity. For that matter, so do most ‘right-thinking’ whites.

Posted by Anonymous at 9:57 PM on May 21


“It’s worth exploring some of the more subtle game theory reasons why there is so little public outcry against discrimination against white males other than fire fighters.”

No exploration necessary. To begin with, do not confuse, inadvertently or otherwise, the public with MSM. It has been proven time and time again that the MSM does not speak for the majority of Americans. But what the media have done, and still do, is use the communist tactic of “create the illusion of popular support”, or in other words, lie. This tactic was used to the extreme back in the ‘60’s “snivel rights” movement, as a means of shutting down or attacking opposition to the movement, and intimidating those who otherwise may have expressed opposition. Because much of the public were not aware of any opposition, they assumed most went along.

The “reasons [or reason] why there is so little public outcry against discrimination against white males other than fire fighters” is, up until the Internet blossomed, the MSM and their embedded elite, held most all the cards when it came to what was covered in media news. If the elite didn’t approve it, it got no exposure.

As for the elite, they have NO concern for minorities, other than to USE them for political mileage. Transcripts of some of Hillary Clinton’s rampages against minorities have been quite revealing, and interesting.

Posted by Otto Maddich at 10:40 PM on May 21


I think a lot of you are misreading this. Sailer
isn’t writing about what should be but just
explaining the way things are (in a somewhat
flippant fashion). I seriously doubt he’s
indifferent to the plight of marginal white males.

Posted by anonymous at 11:13 PM on May 21


“I want the most qualified person saving me from a burning building or operating on me or whatever. If that person is black, fine but if none are, also fine. ONLY qualifications should matter.”
I agree. this Affirmative Action nonsense is a step backward for our society and for race relations. By lowering standards for Blacks, society is constantly telling them that they are inferior to other races and reinforces the idea that they cannot compete on a level playing field. Therefore, should be judge on a much easier scale.

Regardless of what side of the fence you are on, I just don’t see how you can support this kind of policy.

Posted by Guilty of being White at 11:49 PM on May 21


The Steve Sailer crowd has a lot of very smart folks, but they have an unrealistic worldview that ignores any whites who don’t fall in the top segment of the IQ/socioeconomic bell curve. When they say people who “don’t make the cut,” they are dismissing the majority of whites.

The Sailer crowd would prefer to have a black and brown servant caste to gripe about and feel separate from, because it would save them the horror of fitting in among organic society with a healthy and respected white working class. That hurdle aside, Sailerites are a smart and turned on bunch and they see past some important aspects of knee jerk pseudo-conservativism.

Posted by Anonymous at 2:44 AM on May 22


Missing the point! What this fool is missing is that White pride and some sense of White solidarity acted on is necessary for White survival. It is not about what, say, black solidarity is about: affirmative action and special legal protections – which is what this fool is comparing it to – it is about stopping all the pandering to other races by our sell-out politicians (including sellouts like W. Bush, McCain, Lindsey Graham etc…)that for decades has been bringing on a population replacement from Mexico, the Muslim mid-East & other third world.

White pride is very cool because it is about something very different than all the other racial prides. It is about affirming what really deserves to be affirmed, that Whites have made the West and its civilizations, even with its faults, the best of civilizations (which it why it attracts so much immigration) and that Whites are absolutely necessary to keep it that way.

Posted by Say it! at 9:28 AM on May 22


Why so little public outcry?

Argumentum ad Baculum. The people with the gold and the muscle make the rules. Shut up unless you want to get hurt. This says very little for the manly virtue and integrity of white men.

Someone suggested to Wm. F. Buckley many years ago that the solution to the problem of racial preferences would be a law utlawing racial discrimination. But we already had one in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Buckley replied that the law would have to read “racial discrimination is against the law AND THIS TIME WE REALLY MEAN IT.’

Sandra Day O’Connor said in effect that the Supreme Court will let us know when flouting the law won’t be necessary any longer.

White people are in the position of Peter Keating, the self-less, other-directed character in Ayn Rand’s The Fountainhead, who asked with bewilderment what he should do when a rival for his wife proposed that Keating sell her to him. “What should you do? You should have slapped my facr and challenged me to a duel five minutes ago.”

James Burnham and Lawrence Brown wrote, respectively, Suicide of the West and The Might of the West. Both noted that in 1914 a map of the world showed complete white dominance of the earth. Both books were written nearly half a century ago. Since that time not only has white dominance retreated from the world and other nations, now, today, even in once white countries white men are on the run.

When I complained on the front page of the Washington Times about racial discrimination against whites at the Social Security Administration I was suspended by one black supervisor, fired by another, and escorted from the building by an armed black policeman. Before the hearing to which I was entitled under Civil Service rules a notice was sent to me saying that as a white male I was not allowed to appeal on the grounds of racial discrimination because only “protected groups” could do that. At the hearing the Judge refused to define “protected group.”

What are you gonna do, white folks?

Posted by Frank Keliher at 11:13 AM on May 22


Unfortunately, one cannot know which blacks are qualified, and which are unqualified. Sailer discusses the career of Michelle Obama, and correctly points out that since she was unqualified for Princeton and Harvard Law, and was admitted only as an affirmative action quota, she felt intimidated and poorly prepared. Yet she was promoted each year to the next level for which she was unqualified and unprepared, and upon graduation she was unable to effectively practice law, and gave up her law license to accept a more lucrative affirmative action job. Yet now, she is hailed as a mentor to young blacks, and one of the most prominent and effective people in America. The author could easily have chosen Barack Obama instead of his wife as the example of failed affirmative action programs, but perhaps his sensitivities forbade him doing so. We will eventually see that Barack is just as unprepared and unqualified as Michelle, but we will have to wait until the adoring mass media wakes up to his incompetence.

At any rate, to those Whites who say they will accept qualified blacks to save them from a burning building or operate on them, it should be pointed out that there is no way to know before the fact that a particular black is qualified. If you are recommended to have a surgery and the surgeon is black, you cannot know in advance just how qualified he or she may be. Sure, you can look at their medical school, residency training program, state licensure and even their surgical board certification, but each of these steps designed to qualify only the best and weed out the rest are impacted by the government- and culturally-enforced affirmative action programs. So, a black from Harvard Medical School, trained at the Harvard Hospital, licensed in New York, and certified by the American College of Surgery would seem to be well qualified, and you as a patient may be comfortable with him or her operating on you, but affirmative action has, at each step in the process, fudged a little to allow the barely qualified to move up the ladder. If you are one of the lucky ones who have a good operative outcome, you may feel that your surgeon was indeed qualified, and pass him along by word of mouth to the next patient. But if you do not survive, or have a very poor result, it is too late for you to complain that he or she is unqualified because he was an affirmative action surgeon.

The careful patient should still search out the educational experience and qualifications of White surgeons, since the certifying organizations obviously do not apply affirmative action criteria to White surgeons, and the prospective patient can be more assured of accuracy of White surgeons’ qualifications.

I suspect that even a liberal, affirmative action loving left winger would rather not have Michelle Obama represent them as an attorney, despite her current public idolatry.

The point is that you cannot know which blacks are qualified simply because affirmative action prevents the weeding out of the unqualified. Therefore the only responsible action for Whites is to avoid all blacks in all professional situations. One should very carefully consider whether they wish to have a black attorney, physician, financial advisor, money manager, or nurse in a position of providing potentially life changing professional services to themselves or family members. For inconsequential things, such as screenwriting, popular music, acting, sports, jazz music you are in a much less dangerous position to accept affirmative action blacks, if you must, since in these situations, they can only take your money that you willingly give them, but they cannot have a more lasting consequence on your life.

Posted by Anonymous at 12:17 PM on May 22


Our willingness to slaughter our fellow white man in two world wars has gone a long way in reducing our self respect, has it not? I mean, if we were willing to fire bomb thousand year old European cities full of cultural artifacts, why would we be averse to committing genetic suicide sixty years later? Better not confront the “greatest generation” with that one.

Posted by Xenophon at 12:57 PM on May 22


There is so much to potentially comment on in this article. But one item that stood out to me is all these White Hollywood scrpt writers. These are the people responsible for the minority heavy movies and especially tv shows that have been assailing us at a growing rate for years. These are the writers constantly paring up White females with Black males or other non-White males so as to be read as an attempt to shape society.

Steve Sailer may have inadventently identified the location and individuals that are making such an impact on our society. I am willing to bet anything you like that the majority are not only White, but from middle class “Christian” homes. A good strategy might be to figure out how to make race realists of these nerdy cartoon scripters.

Another notable point is one that I have written about often in posts, the latest time just yesterday. Whites aren’t unified because as the majority we compete with one another. And we cannot shake of this sense of “I’ve got mine, you can go **** yourself.” Yesterday I tried to identify it as a sort of 19th century mindset with origins in antebellum American social and political resentments combined with the rush to claim everything from gold to open land. This article further illustrated that idea and helps highlight the idea that Whites will have to become “other White supporting” in a White Socialist sense. As I wrote yesterday, I would be glad to help a young White couple succeed, especially if they are committed to passing on their own racial heritage with pride. This can only be done when all Whites in a given region see the need and strength given everyone in doing this.

I often have mentioned the social system of Slovenia and the high sense of nationalism there. Today I have a report from my good friend there who replied to my innquiry to say that Slovenia is still a nice place, not overrun with Muslims and Black Africans, etc. Slovenia is a sort of Slavic Switzerland, but because it was once part of Yugoslavia it sort of frooze its mindset and still exists without very much of the damaging liberalism that has hurt Western Europe so much. The one flaw I see is that they are a bit like a bunch of political leftist living in a gated community; They hold multicultural ideals, but do not practice them. So far, they are succeeding in thinking of themselves as a progressive society without seeing their hypocracy.

But I wish that we could learn something from the Slovenian example.

Posted by Whiteplight at 1:41 PM on May 22


For Steve Sailer a score on a IQ tests represents some kind of unified theory of human kind.In Sailer’s mind, everything is filtered through the score on an IQ tests.

I blieve that Sailer and his readers have a lot of contempt for those Native Born White Americans who are not part of the “cognitive elite”-whatever the hell this means beyond a score on an IQ test.

You can get a very good idea of what Sailer believes by what he leaves out in his blogs an essays. There is never any mention of the H-1 and L-1 B visa programs. Why is this? I think he does write about this because for him the natural order and constition of a of a society is determined by a scsore on an IQ tests. “Marginal” White Males and the Native Born White victims of the H-1 b and L-1 B programs aren’t very important classes of people for Sailer. Or,to put it another way, Sailer does not have a strong sense of racial solidarity with his fellow White Americans.

Posted by Jupiter at 5:42 PM on May 22


The key to understading Steve Sailer’s aracialism is:1)he has a strong devotion to a top down corporate controlled society and belief that IQ scores are crucial to the efficient slotting of people within a brutal corporate controlled societe. There is no another way to organize a human society. I of course reject this. Everyone else here should also.

I beleive this explains The warm spot in Sailer’s heart for post-1965 asians. The fact that they have greatly harmed thousands of “marginal” Native Born White familes means nothing to Sailer. This is the ket to understanding Sailer’s silly notion of citizenship.

Posted by Jupiter at 5:50 PM on May 22


John PM, Steve is talking about the elite, those at the highest levels of power in the media, law, politics, academia and business. Among such people, concern about whites who are racially discriminated against is zero. CEO’s, writers for The Atlantic, Hollywood producers, Governors etc., simply don’t care about it.

Steve is not endorsing this at all. He is opposed to affirmative action. He is merely explaining why there is no concern from elite whites about other whites who are discriminated against.

It’s also interesting to note how affirmative action has been completely ignored by the GOP and mainstream conservative movement as of late. None of the current conservative movements main constituents — Big Business, Neoconservatives and the Religious Right — really care much about this issue. As recently as the mid 90’s, it was a major issue for conservatives.

Posted by Joe at 6:02 PM on May 22


The only way to reverse or halt the damage that’s been done to our society from the race revolution of the 1960s into the present is to get more Western elites to value their own civilization.
Most people with elite Ivy League educations selfishly limit their sympathies only to their own kind. Carleton Putnam (Princeton graduate) and Jared Taylor (Yale graduate) are the only Americans with elite educations that have had the soul, insight and sense of responsibility to expand their sympathies to the plight of the majority.

Any advancement in protecting the West will have to be a top down effort. I don’t have much faith in populists movements because the elites, with their control of media and public opinion, (not to mention corrupt law enforcement), can quash any such movements with ease. A real movement takes quality leadership.

Posted by edward at 6:04 PM on May 22


Thank you “Kulaks…” Not only for the suggestion, but for your name! I looked it up, and wow! didn’t know that.

“The point is that you cannot know which blacks are qualified simply because affirmative action prevents the weeding out of the unqualified.”
(Anon. 12:17 pm)

Excellent point! Your reply was very well-written.

I would hope that if ever I needed surgery or to be rescued from a burning building, it would be one of my own kind who did so… I don’t care if the whole world knows it or not: When I need a new dentist, eye dr., or whatever, I do a little research to see if he’s white, and have done for years. I’d bet a lot of people do! Maybe only subconsciously, but still, I’d bet they do!

Posted by Mai Opinion at 6:57 PM on May 22


Xenophon above makes a very good point, but I would go one step further: The critical mass of the White Intelligentsia was killed off during those fratricidal/suicidal wars known as WWI & WWII.

After those meat grinders perhaps the White Man and his culture don’t deserve to survive? It is certainly my belief that unless and until the lies propagated about about those conflicts, nothing will change because the ‘powers that be’ continue to hide behind that curtain of lies, and continue to use them as a sales tool to sell their policies of endless wars to the tax payer.

H.F. Wolff

Posted by H.F. Wolff at 7:03 PM on May 22


The Sailer site has the persistent feel of a bunch of intelligent, mild mannered guys exchanging un-PC notes at the water cooler and self consciously tittering over their own naughtiness. “Did you see this chart? It shows blacks have lower IQs than whites.” Then the Asian buddy from three cubicles down walks over, and the white group says, “Psst, guess what Asians are smarter than blacks too. Get a look at this and don’t tell Shaniquia in Accounting! Tee, hee.”

There is a sense of physical security and frivolity to their banter. They are token rebels against their own Flower Child generation, who grew up in orderly and secure conditions of widespread prosperity where experimenting with sex and drugs was about as “risky” as life got. They can’t imagine any other world.

Sailerites are very different from the Korean War era generation whose parents had a living memory of poverty and hunger and violence. Men like Clint Eastwood’s character in “Gran Torino,” who know what men look like with body parts missing understand the world differently than their pampered Vietnam protester children or even more self absorbed and clueless grandchildren.

I think some of the Sailerites have a feeling that their safe, familiar water cooler is standing at the edge of a precipice, and they refuse to look down. Southern California is a dangerous place to be a white person these days, and it will get much worse the instant Schwartzenegger makes good on his proposal to cut welfare entitlements to the brown majority. The economy is worse than what the talking heads are presenting to us.

God help us all, every color, because we fools might need guidance from our Creator sooner than we think.

Posted by Anonymous at 7:44 PM on May 22


Joe

I hope you are right in what you wrote about Sailer. It sure wasn’t obvious to me. Sailer tries to very clever and tendy in his writing. But in doing so,simple and obvious points get lost.

Posted by Jupiter at 7:56 PM on May 22


“None of the current conservative movements main constituents — Big Business, Neoconservatives and the Religious Right — really care much about this issue. As recently as the mid 90’s, it was a major issue for conservatives.”

Big business is just ahead of government and second only to Academia in their promotion of affirmative action. Their official policy and their mission statements are all-go for AA. Obviously it’s just another lie. The diversity managers they have to hire cost real money – even if a ‘diverse’ workforce actually does better work, which doesn’t seem to be the case, as where there is the most diversity, ie, all black, all hispanic, all female, there is not always the most production.

Posted by Anonymous at 11:26 PM on May 22


“When I complained on the front page of the Washington Times about racial discrimination against whites at the Social Security Administration I was suspended by one black supervisor, fired by another, and escorted from the building by an armed black policeman.”

What does this have to do with Ayn Rand, William Buckley and James Burnham? Ok, William Buckley, I get, a little. But I’d be more interested in hearing your story. Speak up for yourself, man.

Posted by Anonymous at 11:34 PM on May 22


That is the point Mr. Sailer consistently misses, when he is discussing the racial spoils system-USA; for every glibly unconcerned white like him, there are probably at a minimum 5 to 10 who harbor the angst and anger that I do about the travesty of forced multicultural “equality.”

Posted by John PM at 6:51 PM on May 21

“glibbly unconcerned white”

Bullseye!

That is the perfect description of Sailer’s basic attitude.
He is one of my favorites at VDARE; but that side of him has always bothered me, alot, and with good reason.

It’s as if he has an empathy chip missing.

Oh well, I guess no one’s perfect. But that is a helluva defect to have toward people like that, during a time like this.

Posted by Dedalus at 12:16 AM on May 23


The hard fact of the matter is that “marginal whites” are probably brighter than 90% of blacks. And I would take a “marginal white” before a marginal black. The marginal white is our people, the marginal black is not.

The hard fact of the matter is that marginal whites will produce smarter children than elite blacks or mestizos (regression to the mean). I hope this meme becomes fixed in the race-realist population (at least) soon.

The hard fact is, marginal whites will produce children WHOSE INTERESTS ARE ALIGNED WITH the children of elite whites, something non-whites of any caliber cannot do.

Elite whites are bound by the culture of critique (Sailer has stated he thinks that culture is hunkey-dorey); this means that if elite whites want to stay that way, they don’t rock the boat. So, I guess we’re discussing sub-elites now, rather than real elites, no?

Posted by Svigor at 1:56 PM on May 23


For inconsequential things, such as screenwriting, popular music, acting, sports, jazz music you are in a much less dangerous position to accept affirmative action blacks, if you must, since in these situations, they can only take your money that you willingly give them, but they cannot have a more lasting consequence on your life.

Yep, widespread worship of blacks cannot have lasting consequences on your life. Would you like fries with your mulatto grandson?

Posted by Svigor at 2:07 PM on May 23


The only way to reverse or halt the damage that’s been done to our society from the race revolution of the 1960s into the present is to get more Western elites to value their own civilization.
Most people with elite Ivy League educations selfishly limit their sympathies only to their own kind. Carleton Putnam (Princeton graduate) and Jared Taylor (Yale graduate) are the only Americans with elite educations that have had the soul, insight and sense of responsibility to expand their sympathies to the plight of the majority.

Any advancement in protecting the West will have to be a top down effort. I don’t have much faith in populists movements because the elites, with their control of media and public opinion, (not to mention corrupt law enforcement), can quash any such movements with ease. A real movement takes quality leadership.

I disagree. I think an elite will NEVER stick up for a populace that won’t stick up for itself. People are primarily self-serving. If those harmed by a policy won’t oppose it, no one will, especially not those served by it. Think of it as leaders and followers; each needs the other. Right now, the leaders are getting what they want, and the followers aren’t. Time for an accounting and subsequent negotiations, I think.

These things are organic. If enough followers show up, leaders will “magically” show up to lead them. But I don’t like the odds of leaders showing up without any followers to lead. The great thing about this is that leaders are whores. They’d get over their distaste for any given political position in about a nanosecond if you make the gravy rich enough.

So, for the umpteenth time, the circle is complete and we’re again looking at who controls our social nervous system (AKA the media, AKA the first estate, AKA the most powerful industry in the world, bar none).

Posted by Svigor at 2:25 PM on May 23


And yes, Sailer’s strategy is to point out facts and do as little drawing of conclusions as possible. It’s a wise policy, designed to protect himself and disarm the haters to the extent possible.

This is not to say I know what he’s “REALLY” thinking. Better ask leftists about that, their powers of telepathy are extraordinary, as they always seem to know what I’m “REALLY” thinking, to the extent that I often have to ask a leftist if I want to know what I’m “REALLY” thinking.

Posted by Svigor at 2:32 PM on May 23


John PM, Steve is talking about the elite, those at the highest levels of power in the media, law, politics, academia and business. Among such people, concern about whites who are racially discriminated against is zero. CEO’s, writers for The Atlantic, Hollywood producers, Governors etc., simply don’t care about it.

But they do care about discrimination against blacks, right? Regardless, they actually DO THINGS TO HELP BLACKS. So, an utter lack of shared experience IS NOT an obstacle in all cases.

Right? I wonder why. OH YEAH, we’re talking about the media AGAIN, aren’t we? Gee, how’d that happen? All roads lead to the media, that’s how.

Tough for an organism to react to a threat that has taken control of its nervous system.

Posted by Svigor at 2:37 PM on May 23


Among the many excellent posts on this article, I have to agree with Xenophone’s short summation, that is actually a small part of John PM’s point, as well as Dedalus’s. The insane butchery between whites, involved in the two world wars, as well as the American Civil War, was beyond a catastrophe. The after effects are still with us. Xenophone states that the greatest generation had best not be confronted with this. Interestingly enough, I have talked to many of that generation, and with the passage of time and the events that have occured, some have actually taken a broader view of their experience. Sadly tho, there are those who went to their graves, never having realized the ultimate impact and meaning of it all, where their own kind was concerned. It is as if the history of white peoples, compared to other races, has been a gigantic struggle between Titans who vied for power among themselves, others being totally irrelevant to their many wars.

Posted by Bobby at 8:00 PM on May 23


I’ll start off by stating I’m Jewish to diffuse any potential problems that might arise from my post. I’m sure most people are aware of how disingenuous this article is in many respects. I work for one of the Hollywood studios and the part of this article I have a pet peeve with is the author mentioning screenwriters and inferring that Hollywood discriminates against blacks. Considering the low numbers of blacks who actually submit work, you’d be surprised that there are as many black screenwriters as there are, especially in TV. I also have to state that the studios do favor my fellow Jews first and foremost over everyone. Call me a self hater, but it’s a fact. The guys who have the toughest time in screenwriting are white males. I hate to admit that many Jewish executives will pass up hiring very good, extremely talented white guys if they can hire a Jewish guy instead. If the Jewish guy is mediocre, he’ll be helped along as much as possible. A lot of the non-Jewish white writers here in Hollywood are guys who became friends with Jews while attending Ivy League schools. No, there’s no anti-white or anti-American conspiracy at the studio where I’m employed. It has more to do with the ridiculous liberal attitudes and basically communist beliefs driven into the brains of so many of my fellow Jews while growing up. Their parents and grandparents here in the US still sometimes act as if they’re in 19th century shtetles. Believe me, a lot of “us” know what’s going on and we’re as irritated over it as other whites are. White Pride should be “cool” and whites should be valued for the achievements they’ve accomplished that have benefitted all of mankind. This bogeyman thinking against whites has to stop.

Posted by Concerned Jewish Guy at 10:26 PM on May 23


I have had more than my fill of Affirmative Action, with its direct impact on me, and other good friends.

As an example, I had taken a Civil Service exam, and scored 95% on the written test. I placed first on the list. I then had to report for a full medical exam,which I had passed with no problem. Then I had to undergo a Psyhcological exam. Again, I had passed that without a problem.

Later that month, after having an Interview, and being “Offered” the job, I was waiting to receive my appointment letter and start date in the mail. It never came, so I decided to call the Civil Service Commission. The woman that I spoke to stated that there was a “Hiring Freeze” for the position I was hired for.

Well, I have a friend whose wife worked in the Civil Service Commission, and she told me that a Black was hired in my place, even though there was a “Hiring Freeze” on at the time.

Sure, there was a Freeze. They were freezing the most qualified Candidate out of the chance to obtain gainful employment, with respect to my credentials, background, and test scores.

This, of course,is not the first time that this has happened to me, or to other White males, either in Civil Service, Union Jobs, or in Corporate positions.

Of course, if you wanted to hire an Attorney that specialized in Civil Service law, the filing, and his fees, at the begining, would be $5,000.00. Who has that kind of money to lay out, on something that could go either way? So, I walked away from it.

The Cities deserve to put Blacks in all the top spots, whether they be in the Fire Department, Police, Corrections, or Sanitation. If anyone thinks that Cities are unlivable now, wait until the Coloreds get all the top jobs. They will run the Cities further into the ground, that they will resemble Zimbabwe, or Haiti.

Posted by Anonymous at 12:58 AM on May 24


Almost by definition whites at the top have avoided affirmative action cuts. They may not have a lot of personal experience with it on the other end.. Also, the work environment could be expected to be better for high achievers too. You can’t expect a lot of sensitivity from them, even during ‘sensitivity’ training week.

Posted by Anonymous at 2:11 AM on May 24


“No, there’s no anti-white or anti-American conspiracy at the studio where I’m employed.”

It’s even worse sometimes, isn’t it, when it’s not like an officially mandated policy yet the outcome is the same if not even more so. Of course those are the places that don’t actually have ‘sensitivity’ programing.

Posted by Anonymous at 2:23 AM on May 24


The Russian goverment and the other Eurpean goverments fell because of at loss of support at the bottom. People in these contries simply stopped obeying. When a critcal number of Native Born White Born Americans start thinking about things differently tings the game will be over.

Catastrophic events will be an inducement to think about things differently.

Posted by Jupiter at 7:58 AM on May 24


What Steve Sailer is doing in this article is engaging in a bit of self-satisfaction. Like the kind of “I’ve got mine, nuts to you.” mentality that we saw a lot of in the 80’s. That never went away in fact, it just was replaced by other culture fads that took the spotlight. But it’s never left the stage, so to speak.

Of course, it’s worth point out that Self-Satisfaction, that brutal middle-class indulgence, is above all else, the number one reason we are in the position we’re in today. I wonder if he’s ever thought about that. Perhaps he has. One time in particular Sailer dismissed a genuine and legitimate concern from a person in the Letters section at VDARE with a rudeness and arrogance that was shockingly stupid, given our situation. Since no one is perfect, and Steve isn’t stupid, I chalked it up to appallingly bad manners. A lack of social deftness, something he shares with Brenda Walker.

Posted by Dedalus at 11:14 AM on May 24


Lots of posts here have hit the nail on the head with Sailer, and, indirectly, not just him.
The combination of snottiness and indifference is one of the the reasons why – important as these websites are – they, unfortunately, amount to what I refer to as the “Look What They Are Doing To Us Now!” websites.
High on Diagnonsis, most of it brilliant, and Low on Solutions.
This is a big – BIG – problem and I think the reason is few if any have given consideration as to what our Society would look like and how we would live together should we, by some miracle, ever win our Country back.

As Patrick Cleburne, of VDARE, said recently, “We need everyone.”

In any event, that Would be an interesting thing to write about on these sites. Something like,
“So Exactly What Kind Of Country Do You Want Anyway?” Or, What’s Your Vision Of A Future Worth Living In?”
I think it would do much to inspire Individuals and energize Group activity.

Posted by Dedalus at 11:48 AM on May 24


To concerned Jewish Guy: I agree with you. I’m part Jewish, but I loathe white guilt, loathe seeing the west being taken over by non-whites who are hostile to us and our way of life. If it’s racist for non-jewish white males to look out for their own, then jewish people (like Tim Wise, for example) should be fair and not exclude themselves from other groups.

Posted by Anonymous at 11:51 AM on May 24


Let me rephrase it this why:The Republican and Democratic beltway consensus requires the consent of a critical number of Native Born White Americans. Without this consent it would crumble. To be even more specific:a critical number of Native Born White Americans continue to vote Republican. Without this support, the corpes of the Republican party would finally be thrown into the town dump with the rest of the rotting garbage. When this happens, events will move ahead very fast. Peter Brimelow is foolish-and anybody else- to attempt. to revive the Republican party.

The revolt against race-replacement at the hands of post-1965 asians,hispanics,muslims and africans has to be uncompromising and complete. Nothing short of reversing the situation to where it was before the passage of the 1965 immigration refrom act should be acceptable. We are moving into very very dangerous territory very rapidly.

If the ecological conciousness of a critical number of Native Born White Americans was much higher, the White racial conciousness would be much higher..right into the red zone. Running away and secession will not solve the problem.Ultimately the US population will explode way above a billion..mostly non-white and there will be a population collapse within the nation formely known as America.. a combination of exponentially growth in the non-white areas and and an increase in the White fertility in the White areas makes this inevitable with 100 percent certainty.

Posted by Jupiter at 12:29 PM on May 24


Oh, I almost forgot.

Posted by Concerned Jewish Guy at 10:26 PM on May 23

Great Post!!!!

I know alot of people on both sides disagree with me; but, Whites – those who identify as Jewish, Or European-American, Christian, Gentile, etc. – need each other and should work together, even putting some issues on pause until we have a society we want to live in and discuss them in a civil manner.
We ought to work together and I was encouraged by the Western Civilization meeting in Baltimore held not so long ago.

Our common ground meets at a number of points – but the only one we really need now is Freedom of Speech.

Posted by Dedalus at 2:42 PM on May 24


We need to hire professional public relations people to teach us the right words and approach. The multi-cultis know how to use language to put us on the defensive, we have to do it against them.

The multi-cultis like to tell us that in 40 years time, the country will be 50% non white. They do this to make us feel like it is inevitable and that it is useless to resist. We need to put the question back to them – after 40 years then what? Will they stop immigration from predominately nonwhite countries then? Of course they won’t and by that time the nonwhite groups will be so politically powerful that there will be no stopping them from contining flood country with their relatives. So after 40 years time, the white population will shrink to 45%, then 40%, then 30% etc. Ask the multi-cultis about this and see what they say. They will of course lie, fudge and use evasive tactics. This is when we can pin them down. Ask them what THEY think the ethnic balance should be. This would put them on the spot, which is what they always try to do to us.

Other things that we can do: we can complain about the large numbers of immigrants that are coming into the country. We can make this a jobs issue. This can have an effect on Democrats because they always talk about protecting jobs. If you live in a Democrat area, tell your politicians that you will never vote Democrat until they stop flooding the country with cheap labor immigrants, and you can throw in illegal aliens. Let them know that you know that the Democrats are encouraging illegals to come here. Tell them that they will have to choose between your real vote or a theoretical future vote of the illegals.

As far refugee resettlement, again contact your mayor, city council, state senate and representatives and governor. Also go to the federal level and notify your senators and representative that you do not want any more of these ill chosen refugee programs. Tell them that there is no need for all the world refugees to come here. Tell them that it would be better if they were resettled in another part of their own country. Try the nimby approach – not-in-my-backyard. This will shake them up.

Posted by julie at 3:23 PM on May 24


Just a little nit picking here about screen writing being a cool job.

It is also just about the easiest writing job around. It’s easier than doing a 10 page high school term paper, especially with word processing. 40 years ago screen writers had to know how to type and set tabs.

It’s really easy and amusing and enjoyable. Stallone knocked out the script of Rocky 1 in three days using pen and paper and then a typewriter.

Selling a script is a whole nother story.

Posted by Anonymous at 4:13 PM on May 24


“Of course, if you wanted to hire an Attorney that specialized in Civil Service law, the filing, and his fees, at the begining, would be $5,000.00. Who has that kind of money to lay out, on something that could go either way? So, I walked away from it. “

Legal ethics prohibit an attorney from taking on a case he can’t win. Even if there were no ethical and professional concerns, attorneys almost never take on cases they cannot win. Nobody works for nothing.

So basically there are no attorneys who will take on a civil rights case for a White. They will lose. Their client may or may not be able to pay the fees and expenses.

Speaking of the civil service commission.

A black woman I worked with told me that the State was giving an exam for Parole Officer. Since I had been a Probation Officer for 12 years I had the necessary experience (2 years). So I called and asked that the exam be sent. I was told, you have to come down in person for it.

I went down in person and was told. “We’re not giving the exam at this time.” I left and walked down the street. I noticed Heald business college. I noticed a large number of young people waiting at the bus stop outside the college. I approached a respectable looking young black man and asked him if he would like to make $20.00 in 15 minutes. I explained what I wanted him to do. He agreed.

We walked back to the Civil Service Commission building. He went to the counter and asked for the Parole Officer Exam. The clerk handed it to him, along with another sheet detailing times and places for the special tutoring classes to prepare for the exam.

He gave me the papers. I gave him the $20.00.

Just one more example of the discrimination against Whites.

Our government is just about 90 percent staffed with incompetent blacks and non White immigrants. I hope I live long enough to see the entire edifice crash down.

Posted by Anonymous at 4:25 PM on May 24


I hate to admit that many Jewish executives will pass up hiring very good, extremely talented white guys if they can hire a Jewish guy instead. If the Jewish guy is mediocre, he’ll be helped along as much as possible.

Posted by Concerned Jewish Guy at 10:26 PM on May 23

Concerned Jewish Guy I heard from many, many sources that many non Jews were considering suing Jerry Seinfield and Larry David for discrimination in favor of Jews when they were doing the Seinfield show. Is this true?

Posted by Anonymous at 4:28 PM on May 24


To Anonymous at 11:51 AM on May 24, your remark about Tim Wise is all too true. As a Jew, he embarrasses me with his hypocrisy. He rants about whites but of course, he himself is above white racism. He is actually one of the most racist social commentators out there. He is merely a con man who has figured out an angle he can use to make easy money. It’s very easy right now to stand up on a podium and bash whites. He and other hypocrites act as if they’re being courageous, but actually their lies and attitudes are supported by the media at large. It’s courageous to stand up for whites because you will be vilified. What Tim Wise engages in is transparent hypocrisy, cowardice and greed.

Steve Sailer can write interesting articles once in a while but he only goes so far. He’s not as courageous as he tries to make himself out to be.

Posted by Concerned Jewish Guy at 4:58 PM on May 24


To Anonymous at 11:51 AM on May 24, your remark about Tim Wise is all too true. As a Jew, he embarrasses me with his hypocrisy. He rants about whites but of course, he himself is above white racism. He is actually one of the most racist social commentators out there. He is merely a con man who has figured out an angle he can use to make easy money. It’s very easy right now to stand up on a podium and bash whites. He and other hypocrites act as if they’re being courageous, but actually their lies and attitudes are supported by the media at large. It’s courageous to stand up for whites because you will be vilified. What Tim Wise engages in is transparent hypocrisy, cowardice and greed.

Steve Sailer can write interesting articles once in a while but he only goes so far. He’s not as courageous as he tries to make himself out to be.

Posted by Concerned Jewish Guy at 4:58 PM on May 24

That’s exactly what I thought about Wise! Why aren’t the majority of whites chasing him out of town and not letting him come to their universities and organizations to speak? It’s funny he talks about “white privilege” and yet he, as you said, is using his white skin to bash whites and, because it’s easy as you said, he’s privileged in that he has the MSM and most other people who won’t criticize him for bashing whites. Are there lots of people out there who are exposing this fraud?

Posted by Anonymous at 7:16 PM on May 24


I was told as a White woman, that AA was for my well being. That, I would in fact be a beneficiary. I didn’t vote for it, Congress did. I am offended that a post here would suggest that I was somehow deficient when losing a job to someone else under AA. Excuse me, if you were already hired under AA how could you possibly lose a job to someone because of AA? BECAUSE!!! A White woman NEVER qualified as an AA hire. EVER.

I lost 2 jobs to minority women. I was told they had to hire them to satisfy a quota. Please don’t tell me that AA has ever helped White women. It’s a lie. Promulgated by Liberals to gain acceptance by gullible women. I’m happy to report the 2 women hired to take my place couldn’t cut it. Both were fired, and I was asked to come back, in one instance to TRAIN a new minority replacement.

Affirmative Action sucks. As a matter of fact, AA is the reason the U.S.A. is going downhill in achievements. It’s the reason government doesn’t work as well, it’s the reason newscasts have all kinds of errors now, nothing works right anymore, there is even electrical outages for no reason….

Posted by knowclothes at 11:02 PM on May 24


There was an interesting article in the Occidental Observer, by Edmund Connelly entitled, “On the Visual Displacement of the White Race”. This article points out some key reasons why we, as a Group, fail to get the Politicians’ attention, for our own concerns, and it lies at the heart of White apathy.

Further, perhaps there is something that we can do to gain the attention of the Politically Correct crowd, in D.C., and in our State Capitals, much the same way the TEA Parties got their attention to those speaking out about the state of taxation in this Country.

I suggest a week without a White man, on the job. Actually, I think a month would really hurt them, but a week would make our point.

It would go something like this. First, there would be no Food Deliveries to all major Food Retail Supermarkets across the Country, by those Over-the-Road Semi Truck Drivers.

Second, there would be no Tug Boat Captains, and Crews, working the major Port Cities around the Country, so Cargo Ships would have to sit at anchor, until our demonstration ran its course.

That means there would be no Inland Water Channel Pilots to bring those large Cargo Ships into port, either. That also means no Cruise Lines leaving these Ports, which were expected to be full with Vacationing Tourists.

Third: Most Air Traffic Controllers are White, and I am sure just one day, never mind one week, would tie up travel, into several knots.

Likewise, for Train Locomotive Motormen, and Conductors.

Many White men are in the Trades, and that is great for them, and their families, as they have a source of employment that cannot be “Outsourced” overseas.

But, for this one week, White men in these Trades should tell everyone, that for the next week, people will have to live with a stopped up toilet, leaky faucet, or hold off on installing a new water heater. Electricians will tell them that they will have to wait for their new circut breakers, light fixtures, or outlets installed. Carpenters will not be able to finish framing their new houses, or adding an addition onto their homes.

Bricklayers and Stone Masons would not be available to build new staircases to their front doors, or complete their new fire places.

I am curious to see, if such an event could be properly organized, what the ramifications would be across the Country. I am certain, that after such a well organized demonstration took place, our demands to our Government Representatives would be the first to be addressed.

Posted by Anonymous at 1:37 AM on May 25


Personal selfishness loses out in the end. Money is at best a means to an end, and too many Republicans forget that completely. Most of the time, when intelligent people close their ears to the truth, it is because they are materially committed to a different path.

Peter Schiff is an example of a person who is putting himself out there speaking the truth for those who have ears to hear. Some will listen, most will not. Most Republicans will not.

The reason Hispanics are multiplying and moving in is that they are engaging in basic work. Life rewards people willing to do basic work. Too many whites have lost their way and are out to sea with no moral compass, committed to lives of selfish waste with no view of the good. That’s a failure of the human mind, a failure to be sharp and clear in thinking, but also a moral failure.

Posted by Anonymous at 9:08 AM on May 25


knowclothes:

I think you’re right, that the affirmative action junkies and pushers are being two-faced about marketing AA to white women. The Ward Connerly organization tried to get the CRI on the MO ballot last year, but didn’t get enough sigs. As it turns out, it was a blessing in disguise, because our wonderful secretary of state, a born with a political silver spoon in her mouth white woman, fooled around w/the ballot language to engineer opposition among white women. MCRI would have failed and the AA junkies would have gloated.

Posted by Question Diversity at 10:37 AM on May 25


Here is a quote from Mr. Taylor’s article linked above in the first paragraph.
“Shelby Steele, has described accurately the kind of ideological foreclosure that has informed racial discourse in America since the ‘60s: “[B]eyond an identity that apologizes for white supremacy, absolutely no white identity is permissible. In fact, if there is a white racial identity today it would have to be white guilt—a shared, even unifying, lack of racial moral authority.””
Obviously I don’t want to speak for Mr. Taylor, but the impression I get is that he seems to think Steele is merely describing how Whites feel about themselves, and that Steele thinks that they shouldn’t. And that is why Mr. Taylor says that Steele has described the situation “accurately.”

But from what I can tell Steele really believes that Whites, in admitting Slavery was wrong, have lost any and all claims to Moral Authority, and that this is a good thing. In fact, it seems to be the one “insight” upon which he has hung his entire intellectual career, ie; it is the sourced HIS “authority.”

Of course, this “insight” is a real howler. Not only did Whites not lose Moral Authority with their confession and admission and attempt to make amends, they placed themselves even higher than any other single group in World History. In fact, it was an example, and not the only one, of a Developing Consciousness, and a Developing Conscience. Something one can only see on the stage of Cultural History, in the geographical areas of Western Europe and North America. Now, this is not to say that this quality has not been hijacked and used against the West, it has. But that’s another matter. The West for me is the Culture of Spiritual Growth, but it has sadly degenerated into a Culture of Arrested Development masked as “Progress.”

But in terms of a Developing Conscience Blacks, on average, are possibly at the absolute bottom in this respect. For example; Blacks have a legitimate Historical grievance against what happened to them, but they have NO legitimacy in holding a grudge against the entire White Race enough to justify any criminal act, including violence, against that Race. Not only do Blacks do this, but even individually, the vast majority hide their personal defects of character behind their Race and their Race behind History. How “Moral” is THAT?

Dostoyevsky once said that “the only way to rejoin Humanity is to confess.” Well, from this perspective the only Race with a legitimate claim TO Moral Authority IS the White Race – OBVIOUSLY!

Where else in the world – Latin America, Africa, the Middle East and Asia (with the exception of Japan) do you see this sort of Self-Reflection, Honesty, and Willingness to Right Wrongs? Where?
The answer is, nowhere!

The problem is that Whites abused this activity and a healthy self-reflection was converted into a relentless and morbid self-probing that was so painful that is was projected away from the Ruling Class of Whites and onto the most vulnerable demographic available, Poor Whites! Who by definition of the Race Hustlers themselves could not be Racist behavior they don’t have power!!!!!!!!!!!! This is the only way Whites have lost their Moral Authority, ie; when they created Political Correctness. But, again, that was the creation exclusively of Whites in Power.
Blacks, non-Whites and their misled, or deeply cynical, Enablers have always said that non-Whites can’t be Racist because they don’t have Power. Well, the one and only demographic without Power today are Poor Whites. So why are they constantly attacked?
Because they have the one thing Power Elite Whites (who are the ones who made up this logic, which makes the whole thing deliciously comic and absurd) don’t have, ie; Lots and lots and lots of experience. Experience with what?
Well, two things of the utmost importance.
Experience, upclose and personal with Non-Whites, and often with fatal and tragic consequences which mold the heart and psyche in a way nothing else can match.
And Experience with Oppression, REAL (as in Race REAList) Oppression, and not the spurious Oppression we hear about all of the time now in spite of all of the evidence to the contrary.
Now we know why they don’t want us to have Freedom of Speech and, more importantly, Assembly!
This is the REAL reason William Rasberry said that it’s always illegitimate for Whites to organize. This is the blathering of a corrupt soul who knows that the only way to keep from being exposed to the blinding light of an unyeilding Reality is to silence, ostracize, demonize, and, if possible, eliminate the one group of people who personify it!
Once again we see that same old tiresome human, all too human, need to run from reality while blaming the victim; this time it’s being played out on the stage of Race Relations. That sound you hear is the Slave Revolt in Morality hitting bottom! It ought to be taken very seriously – because, as far as anyone can tell, it is the crudest, meanest, dumbest, and most violent version of a collective Flight from Reality the World has ever known. It is no dramatic exaggeration to say that however this turns out, the consequences will be felt for millennia.

Posted by Dedalus at 12:49 PM on May 25


knowclothes, thank you for telling your experience as a white women involving affirmative action. From the personal experiences of quite a few white women I have known, I am not surprised at what you wrote. I have, in fact, stated several times on this forum that it is a LIE, it is an absolute LIE, that white women are receiving affirmative action. What confuses so many people are the affirmative action ads and claims that constantly state….minorities and women. This DOES NOT NECCESSARILY MEAN WHITE WOMEN. I have heard from many caucasian females, that they applied for government jobs, for instance, and never received a notice of eligibility. This is all another liberal progressive hoax, as knowclothes has correctly pointed out. These liberal/progressives are vile and deceitfull liars. They are far worse than any conservative you could imagine.

Posted by Bobby at 8:36 PM on May 25

Nine Rioters Arrested After ‘Luton Protest Turned Violent’ – Around 500 demonstrators marched through Luton, Beds, on Sunday waving banners bearing slogans such as “No Sharia Law in the UK” and “Respect our Troops”.

Nine Rioters Arrested After ‘Luton Protest Turned Violent’

More news stories on Britain

Murray Wardrop, Telegraph (London), May 25, 2009

Around 500 demonstrators marched through Luton, Beds, on Sunday waving banners bearing slogans such as “No Sharia Law in the UK” and “Respect our Troops”.

The crowd, which had gathered for a peaceful protest against Muslims who denounced troops returning from Iraq in March, was supposed to be escorted by police along a planned route.

But officers ended up fighting running battles with protesters after the some of mob bolted and began attacking Asian residents.

Police drafted in cavalry, dog handlers and riot officers at 5pm in an attempt to control the crowd, some of whom wore balaclavas and shirts bearing St George’s Cross.

At one point the mob appeared to be charging in the direction of Bury Park, an area of Luton where many of the town’s Asian population live.

The crowd convened on the steps of Luton’s town hall, where many began chanting “terrorists out” before dispersing.

The march was organised by a group called United People of Luton (UPL), in protest against Muslim preachers who marred the homecoming parade of the 2nd Battalion The Royal Anglian Regiment.

On March 10 extremists, including the activist Sayful Islam, jeered 200 soldiers and waved placards calling them “Butchers of Basra”, “murderers” and “baby-killers”.

It led to fury from families of soldiers and was condemned by Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Britain’s former most senior Muslim police officer, Tarique Ghaffur.

UPL spokesman Wayne King, 24, who helped organise Sunday’s march, said: “We want laws brought in to stop these preachers of hate operating here in Luton.

“We decided enough was enough after the soldiers got heckled as they marched through the town centre by the Muslim extremists.”

A spokeswoman for Bedfordshire Police said: “Nine people are in custody for a range of offences including criminal damage and assault.”

Several cars were damaged in the riot and an Asian-owned business had its windows smashed.

A group called March for England had applied to Luton Borough Council for permission to march through the town centre but their request was turned down.

The council said it had become aware that a small group of people planned to go ahead with the march anyway.

[Editor’s Note: A video of the Luton anti-Muslim demonstrations can be viewed at YouTube here. Just a few minutes of the 10-minute clip will give you a flavor of the protest.]

Original article

(Posted on May 26, 2009)

Georgia Lawmaker Wants to End ‘Birthright Citizenship’

Georgia Lawmaker Wants to End ‘Birthright Citizenship’

More news stories on Immigration Law

AP, May 25, 2009

U.S. Rep. Nathan Deal, a Republican candidate for governor of Georgia, has proposed changing the long-standing federal policy that automatically grants citizenship to any baby born on U.S. soil, a move opposed by immigrant rights advocates.

Supporters of Deal’s proposal say “birthright citizenship” encourages illegal immigration and makes enforcement of immigration laws more difficult. Opponents say the proposed law wouldn’t solve the illegal immigration problem and goes against this country’s traditions of welcoming immigrants.

Automatic citizenship is enshrined in the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which says: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” That provision, ratified in 1868, was drafted with freed slaves in mind.

Deal and his supporters say the 14th Amendment wording was never meant to automatically give citizenship to babies born to illegal immigrants.

{snip}

Under Deal’s proposal, babies born in the U.S. would automatically have citizenship only if at least one of their parents is a U.S. citizen or national, a legal permanent resident of the U.S., or actively serving in the U.S. military.

Azadeh Shahshahani, director of the Immigrants Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia, said the proposed law “is not cognizant with the American spirit.”

{snip}

Lisa Navarrete, vice president of the National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic advocacy group, said the proposed law wouldn’t stem illegal immigration and would make the problem worse because not only would illegal immigrants be undocumented, their American-born children would be too.

“The worst part of it is you end up with potentially millions of children who are stateless, who were born here and have no ties to any other country, yet they’re not considered citizens or part of the United States,” she said.

{snip}

Deal, who has submitted his bill to the House Judiciary Committee, said he’s not optimistic about it becoming law this year unless it is tacked onto another bill.

{snip}

Original article

(Posted on May 26, 2009)

Identity Politics and Sotomayor

Identity Politics and Sotomayor

More news stories on Racial Identity

Stuart Taylor, National Journal, May 23, 2009

“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion [as a judge] than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”—Judge Sonia Sotomayor, in her Judge Mario G. Olmos Law and Cultural Diversity Lecture at the University of California (Berkeley) School of Law in 2001

The above assertion and the rest of a remarkable speech to a Hispanic group by Sotomayor—widely touted as a possible Obama nominee to the Supreme Court—has drawn very little attention in the mainstream media since it was quoted deep inside The New York Times on May 15.

It deserves more scrutiny, because apart from Sotomayor’s Supreme Court prospects, her thinking is representative of the Democratic Party’s powerful identity-politics wing.

Sotomayor also referred to the cardinal duty of judges to be impartial as a mere “aspiration because it denies the fact that we are by our experiences making different choices than others.” And she suggested that “inherent physiological or cultural differences” may help explain why “our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.”

So accustomed have we become to identity politics that it barely causes a ripple when a highly touted Supreme Court candidate, who sits on the federal Appeals Court in New York, has seriously suggested that Latina women like her make better judges than white males.

Indeed, unless Sotomayor believes that Latina women also make better judges than Latino men, and also better than African-American men and women, her basic proposition seems to be that white males (with some exceptions, she noted) are inferior to all other groups in the qualities that make for a good jurist.

Any prominent white male would be instantly and properly banished from polite society as a racist and a sexist for making an analogous claim of ethnic and gender superiority or inferiority.

{snip}

I have been hoping that despite our deep divisions, President Obama would coax his party, and the country, to think of Americans more as united by allegiance to democratic ideals and the rule of law and less as competing ethnic and racial groups driven by grievances that are rooted more in our troubled history than in today’s reality.

I also hope that Obama will use this Supreme Court appointment to re-inforce the message of his 2004 Democratic convention speech: “There’s not a black America, and white America, and Latino America, and Asian America; there’s the United States of America.”

But in this regard, the president’s emphasis on selective “empathy” for preferred racial and other groups as “the criteria by which I’ll be selecting my judges” is not encouraging, as I explained in a May 15 post on National Journal’s The Ninth Justice blog.

As for Sotomayor’s speech, fragmentary quotations admittedly cannot capture every qualification and nuance. She also stressed that although “men lawyers .&nsbp;. . need to work on” their “attitudes,” many have already reached “great moments of enlightenment.” She noted that she tries to be impartial. And she did not overtly suggest that judges should play identity politics.

{snip}

The full text of the speech, as published in the Berkeley La Raza Law Journal in 2002, is available on The New York Times website. (It says that the speech was in 2002; I’ve read elsewhere that it was October 2001.)

To some extent, Sotomayor’s point was an unexceptionable description of the fact that no matter how judges try to be impartial, their decisions are shaped in part by their personal backgrounds and values, especially when the law is unclear. As she detailed, for example, some studies suggest that female judges tend to have different voting patterns than males on issues including sex discrimination.

{snip}

Do we want a new justice who comes close to stereotyping white males as (on average) inferior beings?

{snip}

I do not claim that the very different worldview displayed in Sotomayor’s speech infuses her hundreds of judicial opinions and votes rendered over more than a decade on the Appeals Court. But only a few of her cases have involved the kind of politically incendiary issues that make the Supreme Court a storm center.

IIn one of her few explosive cases, Sotomayor voted (without writing an opinion) to join two colleagues in upholding what I see as raw racial discrimination by New Haven, Conn. The city denied promotions to the firefighters who did best on a test of job-related skills because none was black. (See my column, “New Haven’s Injustice Shouldn’t Disappear.”)

{snip}

sotomayor
Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

Original article

(Posted on May 26, 2009)

Obama Chooses Sotomayor for Supreme Court

Deborah Tedford, National Public Radio, May 26, 2009

President Obama on Tuesday nominated U.S. Circuit Judge Sonia Sotomayor to serve on the Supreme Court, tapping the daughter of Puerto Rican parents to succeed retiring Justice David Souter and become the first Hispanic to serve on the high court.

Calling Sotomayor “an inspiring woman,” Obama said that he looked not only at intellect and the ability to be impartial, but at life experience and the ability to relate to ordinary Americans in choosing Sotomayor as his nominee.

At a White House news conference, Sotomayor thanked the president for “the most humbling honor” of her life. “My heart today is bursting with gratitude,” she said.

If confirmed by the Senate, the 54-year-old judge will bring nearly 17 years of experience on the federal bench and a history of bipartisan appeal to the high court. She was first appointed to federal bench in the Southern District of New York in 1992 by President George H.W. Bush and was named to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals by President Bill Clinton in 1998.

Hispanic Groups Laud Choice

Obama said Sotomayor has more experience as a judge than any of the justices had when they were nominated for their positions on the high court.

Hispanic groups lauded the president’s choice. “The Supreme Court should reflect the diverse population of the United States to ensure that our nation’s highest court understands the unique circumstances of all Americans,” said Brent Wilkes, national executive director of the League of United Latin American Citizens.

If confirmed, Sotomayor will join Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as the second woman on the current court and the third in history. Sotomayor, like the retiring Souter, is expected to vote with the court liberals.

Republicans are not expected to put up much of a fight against the nomination. Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine said Republicans would have a difficult time taking on a judge that was first appointed to the federal bench by Republican.

“She’s been pretty carefully vetted and analyzed already, so I would find it unusual if they were to decide to try to take her on,” Kane said.

Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele said the upcoming court vacancy provides an opportunity to discuss the role the Supreme Court has in the daily lives of Americans.

“Republicans look forward to learning more about federal appeals court judge Sonia Sotomayor’s thoughts on the importance of the Supreme Court’s fidelity to the Constitution and the rule of law,” Steele was quoted saying on the RNC Web site.

Republicans Want Time for Debate

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said his colleagues will treat Sotomayor fairly but want time to debate her qualifications.

“We will thoroughly examine her record to ensure she understands that the role of a jurist in our democracy is to apply the law even-handedly, despite their own feelings or personal or political preferences,” McConnell said in a statement posted on his Web site.

Sotomayor predicted senators would come to see her as an ordinary person who has had some extraordinary opportunities.

“I hope that as the Senate and American people learn more about me, they will see that I am an ordinary person who has been blessed with extraordinary opportunities and experiences,” Sotomayor said.

During the East Room announcement, the president cited Sotomayor’s educational accomplishments at Princeton University—where she graduated summa cum laude in 1976—and Yale University Law School. He also said her stint trying criminal cases as an assistant district attorney in Manhattan after her graduation from Yale Law School, corporate law experience and time as a trial judge gave her an edge because she has seen the judicial system from many perspectives.

One of her most prominent rulings came in 1995, when she sided with Major League Baseball players in a labor strike that had led to the cancellation of that season’s World Series.

“Over a distinguished career that spans three decades, Judge Sotomayor has worked at almost every level of our judicial system, providing her with a depth of experience and a breadth of perspective that will be invaluable as a Supreme Court justice,” Obama said.

The president also said he was moved by her inspirational personal story.

Sotomayor was raised in a housing project in New York’s South Bronx by Puerto Rican parents who came to the United States during World War II. Her father was a factory worker who had a third-grade education and spoke no English. He died when she was 9, a year after she was diagnosed with Type 1, or juvenile, diabetes.

Sotomayor said she was strongly influenced by her mother, who served in the Women’s Army Corps and often worked two jobs to support Sotomayor and her brother, Juan.

“I have often said that I am all I am because of her, and I am only half the woman she is,” Sotomayor said, recognizing her mother and other family members seated in the audience as the president announced her nomination.

An Upward Career Path

Obama said the couple believed in the American dream and the power of education. Sotomayor attended Catholic school and went on to attend Princeton and Yale.

From 1984 until her appointment to the bench, Sotomayor practiced international business law at the New York-based firm of Pavia & Harcourt LLP. There, she focused on intellectual property issues and litigation and arbitration of commercial and commodity export trading cases, according to her appeals court biography.

Later, Sotomayor became a member of the 2nd Circuit Task Force on Gender, Racial and Ethnic Fairness in the Courts, which was established in 1993 to examine the effect of bias on court employees and litigants. She has also remained active in legal education, serving as an adjunct professor at New York University School of Law from 1998-2007 and as a lecturer-in-law at Columbia Law School since 1999.

She has also served on the Board of Directors of the State of New York Mortgage Agency, the New York City Campaign Finance Board, the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund and the Maternity Center Association.

Original article


Comments

That’s right: a “Latina” woman with her “Latina” experiences is the best person to hold one of the highest positions in our legal system, which is based on ENGLISH common law.

I wish these “proud” Latinos would live in a Latin country.

Posted by passingthru at 5:57 PM on May 26


I like her rags to riches life story. Therefore, it is really sad that she has spent a lot of time on the 2nd Appellate Circuit, and will spend more on the Supreme Court, denying such opportunities to non-rich whites.

I get the feeling that almost every promotion she has had until now (and honestly, counting now) has been affirmative action. If I’m reading her narrative right, her first job out of law school was in the New York City District Attorney’s office. I’m sure that in a city like New York, that affirmative action is used heavily in hiring fresh out of law school lawyers for the DA’s office.

Did I miss the provision in the Constitution that Supreme Court justices must have graduated from an Ivy League law school? I think we need more Jesuit law school grads on SCOTUS.

It is more likely that the moon is made of green cheese than the Senate Republicans will put up a filibuster. With luminaries in its ranks like Lindsay Grahamnesty, John McAmnesty, Samnesty Brownback, John Cornesty and Kay Bailey Amnesty, the Stupid Party sits in the election patch every other early November waiting for the Great Hispanic Vote Pumpkin to arise from the ground. Of course it never arises, though Linus Van Amnesty never has to worry about missing the party because the other party is the one that wins. I think many Senate Republicans would rather die or live under Marxist tyranny than offend a Hispanic.

Posted by Question Diversity at 6:06 PM on May 26


This could be the old ‘let’s put out an extremist first who we know will be turned down so we can nominate a ‘moderate”

Here’s the Sotomayor video where she talks about how judges are not supposed to set policy (*wink*). The chuckling by the group says it all:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfC99LrrM2Q

Posted by sbuffalonative at 6:16 PM on May 26


“Obama nominee says Hispanic women wiser than white men”

Thank you, AmRen. I have read quite a few articles on her since the announcement by the blessed Adiministration, and was beginning to think, hmm, is this actually a “minority” without the usuall baggage? Thank you for the answer, AmRen.

Posted by Bobby at 6:31 PM on May 26


Obama is an expert on intelligence. It’s his third strongest area of knowledge. First is US geography . I bet he could name all 57 states. Second is languages. Obama speaks fluent Austrian.

Posted by Anonymous at 6:39 PM on May 26


I am glad to hear Judge Sotomayor is honest about personal bias. While she is the wrong color to judge me or my racial brethren, she at least has opened the door to bringing bias up at her confirmation; and for once it would be a non-white female who is called to account for racism and sexism.

Posted by PhiliplL at 7:27 PM on May 26


Give me a blankety-blank-blanking break! When will we, white people, finally have enough of this @*$% ? Why have a Title VII? Why have a Civil Rights Act? When will we finally stand up and call these people out on their racially-motivated decisions? When will we finally say enough is enough?

How many more laughably transparent decisions like this will we tolerate before we tell these minorities to go pound sand? Not only did Obama-rama make a decision based on gender, he made one on race as well!

Posted by Quiet Professional at 8:29 PM on May 26


“The above assertion and the rest of a remarkable speech to a Hispanic group by Sotomayor—widely touted as a possible Obama nominee to the Supreme Court—has drawn very little attention in the mainstream media since it was quoted deep inside The New York Times on May 15.”

What the fat latina said didn’t get much attention due to our mainstream media being a highly controlled “entertainment” “forum” run by people who form groups with other people in business and academia and the military etc… and decide by exerting insidious influence what will be cencored and what will not. One world socialist order is the order of the day so whites will be controlled and kept in order while the fat latina and her like will move forward as planned.

Posted by Chief at 8:39 PM on May 26


It could have been worse. She is much better than the neo-con totalitarian Elena Kagan.

Posted by Gustav at 8:45 PM on May 26


Our ancestors, going back several millenia, believed that women should hold their tongues in public & wield no political power. This is why. Generations of far wiser men, & not only white ones, are now rolling in their graves.

Posted by JustSaying at 8:51 PM on May 26


It would seem that if the Republicans had any spine, which they don’t, they should be able to derail Sotomayer’s nomination by drawing attention to the speech and the New Haven firemen case. But pigs will fly when this happens.

It’s a shame to see this judge, who rose to her position thanks to the goodwill and civilization of White Men, reveal herself as another of the identity ingrates.

Posted by Dutchman at 8:52 PM on May 26


George Washington and Thomas Jefferson could have learned a lot from this wise Latina woman.

Posted by Sean at 8:53 PM on May 26


“I am glad to hear Judge Sotomayor is honest about personal bias. While she is the wrong color to judge me or my racial brethren, she at least has opened the door to bringing bias up at her confirmation; and for once it would be a non-white female who is called to account for racism and sexism.”

I’m glad to hear it to. But care to name one Republican who will take her to task over her racism?

Posted by Bernie at 9:22 PM on May 26


This brutish-looking woman has a neanderthal appearance and from her many unintelligent remarks it’s plain to see that she’s no more than a buffoon.

We’re now at the stage where incompetent non-whites can utter almost anything they desire that insults whites with no fear at all of being held accountable for it.

We can thank our spinless, gutless leaders for the situation we’re in, and, most especially, Ted Kennedy, the greatest traitor our people has ever known.

This is just more irrefutable proof that the US is continuing to degenerate further toward third world levels and, eventually, large scale civil strife.

Posted by ranger at 9:50 PM on May 26


“Any prominent white male would be instantly and properly banished from polite society as a racist and a sexist for making an analogous claim of ethnic and gender superiority or inferiority.”

In spite of the obvious fact that his claim would be much closer to the truth than that of Sotomayor’s.

Posted by Dedalus at 10:02 PM on May 26


Ah! The richness and the wonder of a wise Latina woman! Oh we so yearn for her wisdom and instruction on how to discriminate even more against the evil blue-eyed devils – us.

Posted by Awakened at 10:12 PM on May 26


Sorry AmRen denizens, Ms. Sotomayor is right. A “latina” women would not be stupid enough to create a system for her own people to be displaced. White men did.

Posted by Flamethrower at 10:36 PM on May 26


I’m no legal scholar, but this appointment reeks of affirmative action. Perhaps this will serve to wake a few people up (if they can pull themselves away from the basketball game) to the fact that they are being systematically displaced.

Posted by Randolph Carter at 10:36 PM on May 26


“Our ancestors, going back several millenia, believed that women should hold their tongues in public & wield no political power.”

That’s why they call women’s right to vote, “Suffrage”.

Posted by Anonymous at 11:03 PM on May 26


This is just another domino in the chain that quite clearly shows me one simple thing.

Fellow AmRen posters, I read your posts and don’t agree with all of you all the time, but can certainly understand how most of you feel.

We, as a nation, are watching the federal government assume more and more power in (and through identity politics like this OVER) our daily lives.

When you finish reading this post, please do some research on the growing 10th Amendment movement in our country. More and more people in our country are recognizing that the federal government simply wields too much power over how we live our daily lives.

This site has been down due to high traffic (it was recently featured in a Fox News Article), but please visit it:

http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/

Posted by Anonymous at 11:46 PM on May 26


Obama is an expert on intelligence. It’s his third strongest area of knowledge. First is US geography . I bet he could name all 57 states. Second is languages.

Speaking of languages…does anyone know if Obamaster speaks INDONESIAN?? a mostly MUSLIM language or perhaps Kenyan (whatever it is they speak there) And a bufoon she may be, BUT she will be a bufoon on the SUPREME COURT FOREVER!!

Posted by SKIP at 12:38 AM on May 27


Judges should behave as a neutral umpire. Would you want an umpire to favor the Yankees over the Red Sox during a game? With Sotomayor’s empathy and identity politics favoring certain groups over others, does that mean a black judge favoring other blacks, white judges favoring other whites, or a gay judge favoring other gays? If that’s the case then multiculturalism is a lie and will never work. You will have every group fighting every other group for power and rights over the other groups. There will be nothing but constant fighting and bickering within society: tribe against tribe. This is what happens in third world countries where objectivity and the rule of law is ignored. Rulings there are based on feelings and prejudices. As far as “empathy” is concerned, does that mean that a judge who feels sorry for a criminal should let him go free. The ultimate solution, if the above is true, would be to separate and segregate the various racial and ethnic groups.

Posted by Anonymous at 12:53 AM on May 27


Perhaps the coronation of Sotomayor will be the final nail in the coffin of the Stupid Party and will finally motivate more Whites to look for Real Alternatives that actually in fact look out for their White Nationalist Interests.

I mean if they can’t stop Sotomayor, seriously what good is the Stupid Party anymore?!?!?!?

Posted by Dunkanoion at 3:43 AM on May 27


“I have been hoping that despite our deep divisions, President Obama would coax his party, and the country, to think of Americans more as united by allegiance to democratic ideals and the rule of law and less as competing ethnic and racial groups driven by grievances that are rooted more in our troubled history than in today’s reality.”

This, ladies and gentlemen, is exactly the type of “conservatives” we should avoid like the plague. The type who “believe” and “hope” that “we shall overcome” racial and cultural differences. These people want to convince us that we should adopt a so-called colorblind approach and get others to do the same. If we follow their advice we will most assuredly lose our country.

Instead, I suggest, we should follow the advice of white men (not ‘males’) like Jared Taylor and strengthen our own racial feelings so we can, finally, advance our interests.

Posted by VanSpeyk at 4:03 AM on May 27


Think of this as a test case. If Obama can get her with little opposition, then he can basically get even more radical nominees on the bench in the future.

Posted by Southern Hoosier at 4:16 AM on May 27


I am normally not one to judge on looks but this one looks rotten to the very soul. Just looking at her makes me queasy like she just exudes hatred.

Posted by Anonymous at 5:01 AM on May 27


Actually, I completely agree with the statement ‘Hispanic women are wiser than White men’ – after all since the whole edifice of White male supremacy started crumbling in the USA, it was only the lassitude, ineptness and sheer naivety and foolishness of White men themselves that enabled the transformation.
I’m pretty sure that once Hispanic women have taken power, they’ll hold on to it, no matter what.

Posted by Kenelm Digby at 5:48 AM on May 27