July 12, 2013

Amnesty v. Path to Citizenship

The Washington Post's moderate Republican columnist Kathleen Parker opinionizes:
Likewise, Republicans are not shooting straight when they insist that the Senate bill’s path to citizenship is de facto amnesty. As paths go, it’s a 13-year pilgrimage along a precipice lined with bramble bushes — taxes, fines and various burning hoops through which one must leap in order to stand in line. Hardly rose-petal strewn.

I don't think Ms. Parker is being disingenuous here. She's just got it stuck in her head that "amnesty" is what some Democratic extremists want, while "a path to citizenship" therefore must be the moderate compromise between the liberal la-la land of "amnesty" and the horrors  of "self-deportation" (i.e., going home).

In reality, of course, "a path to citizenship" is just amnesty plus the vote and other privileges. Karl Rove, for example, proposed in 2004 amnesty without "a path to citizenship." He didn't call it amnesty, of course, for the simple reason that it was amnesty.

Mickey Kaus explains:
GOP legislators said the biggest question was whether to give the 11 million immigrants living illegally in the United States a path to eventual citizenship, as provided by the Senate measure.–CNN, July 11 
For months, Democrats have been saying they won’t agree to an immigration bill unless it has a “path to citizenship.” Reporters wrote it down. Many Republicans have also been saying the key sticking point is over the “path to citizenship”–they oppose it. Reporters wrote that down too, and declared  “citizenship” the big line-in-sand battleground in the immigration debate. 
The only problem is, this was BS.  Citizenship isn’t the big dealbreaker issue. That’s because Democrats would ultimately–reluctantly, of course–accept a bill that did not give illegal immigrants a “path to citizenship” if it gave Dems what they really want, namely quick legal status before any new enforcement measures must be in place.  Legalization gives the undocumented most of what they need from immigration refom–they can work, get driver’s licenses, etc. without fear of ICE. And if the legalization comes before enforcement, not only wouldn’t the undocumented have to wait very long, but Democrats would have the chance to water down the enforcement as soon as the the undocumented were in the clear (as Democrats, including Chuck Schumer, did after the 1986 reform). 
Legalization First–that’s the real dealbreaker issue for Dems.

Now, that reminds me of a sociological issue. Ms. Parker, for example, appears to be a nice, well-adjusted lady. From Wikipedia:
Parker grew up in Winter Haven, Florida, graduated from Winter Haven High School in 1969, and attended Converse College before transferring to Florida State University where she majored in Spanish Literature. She also holds a Master's degree in the subject from Florida State. 
She is married to an attorney, has three sons, and currently resides in Camden, South Carolina.[5]

A political party like the Republicans should be proud that it represents a lot of fine, upstanding, agreeable Core Americans like Kathleen Parker. The problem is that to avoid getting taken to the cleaners by the Democrats on an issue that they enjoy thinking about far more than the typical well-adjusted Republican, you also need a few smart, cynical misfits, too. 

Mickey, for example, is the kind of guy who graduates from Harvard Law School and then never practices law. A reasonable person who goes to all the expense and trouble of going to Harvard Law School and then doesn't practice law usually has something even better-paying to do. My cousin, for example, went to a fine law school, but then didn't take the bar exam because his older brother helped him get started in San Francisco real estate and development, in which he has done very well for himself. Mickey instead goes to work for the Washington Monthly magazine, run by the notoriously cynical/honest Charles Peters. Not a wise career move! In an age of feeding the blog beast, Mickey ekes out superbly crafted post every few days.

61 comments:

Anonymous said...

Yeah, Pulitzer-ditz Parker is the type of person I could imagine at a party not going over to talk to bedraggled ADD proto-warblogger Kaus (who I believe sometimes still writes to himself in the 2nd person, or using the voice of an imaginary editor).

IHTG said...

Are you attempting to suggest something, Steve?

Anonymous said...

White boys are swooning about Idris Elba in PACIFIC RIM. He makes them feel like wussy jungle feverish white girls. They wanna be cuckolded by Idris with themselves as the girls.

White boys are even dreaming of Elba as the new Bond. Ken Burnsiztion of the white boy.

Elba is big and manly but also a nice negro. Sexual winner but not a beater-up of white boys. White boys are so grateful.

I guess he's Rodney King redeemed.

Anonymous said...

http://www.theimaginativeconservative.org/cleverly-postmodern-homer-a-review-of-the-troy-movie/

Looks nice but bad script and overblown direction.

Anonymous said...

I am curious what Kaus does all day. Manage bloggingheads? I don't think he's spending 40 hours per week on three blog posts, though I do agree their average quality is high.

As to your larger point that the alt right needs more crafty cynics, I agree. The strong anti-Semetic and anti-gay tone of many of the bloggers and their comments strongly deters this, such as the dumb "Scots Irish" meme in comments here.

These are two groups that have much higher than average verbal skills, plus the willingness to relocate to large cities where policy and elite opinions are made, plus the willingness to take low-wage high-influence jobs.

Anonymous said...

The whole amnesty bill push has been really depressing. The outright lying by the entire elite media and most of the GOP establishment is like something out of the Soviet Bloc.

I would not mind people just saying "I think we should allow 15 million illegals, mostly Mexicans, to stay here permanently, plus allow their relatives to stream in via chain migration."

The WSJ editorial page often advocated completely open borders, but was honest about it.

Now you have Marco Rubio going on TV outright lying about things like the idea that we have the ability to perform background checks on millions of people, that they have any ability to "pay back taxes" and this is an actual requirement, etc.

David Brooks got into the act with his most recent column, where he said immigrants "push" low skill natives into better jobs. He isn't so stupid to think that's the case, and the statistics saying otherwise are widely available on the Internet, though never mentioned in the N.Y. Times.




Anonymous said...

My instinct is to put Parker in the same barrel with the white lawyer/pundit/analysts I'm seeing every night covering the Zimmerman case who want so much to be seen as sympathetic to the notion that Trayvon Martin was an innocent "child" who went out to buy Skittles and iced tea.

There is some social or professional opportunism for these people that they put above the life of this ordinary person, George Zimmerman. My gut tells me this Parker woman would fit right in because she doesn't give a darn about the lives of ordinary people who will be competing for jobs and wages worse than they are already.

There is some kind of infection in these people, some sickness that they have this vast uncontrollable greed for whatever they can get and no matter how much harm it does to people they don't have to have anything to do with. Nice lady, no.

Anonymous said...

Mickey instead goes to work for the Washington Monthly magazine, run by the notoriously cynical/honest Charles Peters.

Do they have Komment Kontrol over there?

Just curious.

David said...

If anyone can save us, it's the misfits. The fit-ins are too often lemmings, obediently leaping off any cliff they're pointed to.

TontoBubbaGoldstein said...

Kathleen Parker is a moron.

john marzan said...

cbs outs big brother racists on air
http://www.slate.com/blogs/trending/2013/07/08/big_brother_racists_video_shows_contestants_make_racist_homophobic_comments.html

Ichabod Crane said...

Is Steve saying cynical misfits aren't reasonable? ("A reasonable person [handles a prestegious degree differently from Kaus.]") How does forgoing a lucrative career make Kaus more valuable than if he were reasonable about his personal finances AND influential. Is Steve conflating the usefulness of the smart, cynical service he and Kaus provide with their failure to get rich despite being smart?

Semi-employed White Guy said...

Is nitwit Kathy Parker still around? The last time I heard her name was when she got axed from that CNN show with Client #9.

I really can't understand how such a mediocrity can be syndicated when there are so many great bloggers out there who don't get a dime for their writing.

Noah172 said...

Shorter Steve:

The American right needs more smartass Jews to counter the left's smartass Jews -- but smartass Jews who also can be trusted not to stab their goyish allies in the back.

Jack Hanson said...

Whiskey,

When you posted at 1:10 AM you forgot to log in.

Who the fuck is swooning over Elba except cucked omega lefties, if anyone?

Anonymous said...

"The whole amnesty bill push has been really depressing. The outright lying by the entire elite media and most of the GOP establishment is like something out of the Soviet Bloc."

This is how the power elite act when they want something bad enough. When the WaPo/NYT/WSJ/FoxNews and DC insiders all join forces, they feel they have a perfect right to lie, dissemble and basically fool the average "middle American" into not opposing it.

Sadly, they almost ALWAYS succeed. That's because even the intelligent and knowledgeable middle and working class Americans are simply too lazy to keep up the opposition. At a certain point, they always throw in the towel and go back to watching football.

Anonymous said...

As for Kaus, the answer is that he probably inherited quite a of money, so he doesn't have to work too hard.

His father was a California SC judge, who bought a lot of real estate years ago.

Scheissherr said...

"As to your larger point that the alt right needs more crafty cynics, I agree. The strong anti-Semetic and anti-gay tone of many of the bloggers and their comments strongly deters this, such as the dumb "Scots Irish" meme in comments here."

Problem is the Jews are among the biggest supporters of open borders, largely because they figure a diverse country can't pick them out and ship them to the ovens--that's one of the big differences between America and Weimar Germany. (There are others, of course.)

I personally think you could probably work out some kind of a deal--if the Jews aren't trying to dump immigrants on you, they're personally harmless (ever been mugged by one?), and usually stay cooped up in NYC and LA and other places patriotic Americans don't want to live--but the alt-righters have probably thought about this longer and harder than I have.

Anonymous said...

Micky Kaus is an immigration realist. He knows all the games and deceptions of the open borders crowd and cheap labor crowd. The lying sacks of shit in DC are the cynics here. MK exposes their cynical ploys and manipulations and good for him. Steve does the same.

I've been reading up on Washington DC's immigration lies since 1992 so am in the same camp

Bill said...


Anonymous said . . .

As to your larger point that the alt right needs more crafty cynics, I agree. The strong anti-Semetic and anti-gay tone of many of the bloggers and their comments strongly deters this, such as the dumb "Scots Irish" meme in comments here.

How does the "strong anti-Semitic and anti-gay tone" deter crafty cynicism, exactly? Given the pose of wide-eyed philosemitic homophilia adopted by our evil elite, I would have thought those things the epitome of cynicism. It may not be crafty enough for you, but how does it deter craftiness?

And the Scots-Irish meme is anti-Whiskey. Is Whiskey your idea of craftiness?

[Jews and gays] are two groups that have much higher than average verbal skills, plus the willingness to relocate to large cities where policy and elite opinions are made, plus the willingness to take low-wage high-influence jobs.

MmmmK, but noticing those facts generally wins you the anti-Semitic homophobia prize. Maybe if you are a gay Jew in the midst of praising both groups for their invaluable contributions to our national policy debate you can avoid it, but maybe not.

anonyias said...

"These are two groups that have much higher than average verbal skills, plus the willingness to relocate to large cities where policy and elite opinions are made, plus the willingness to take low-wage high-influence jobs."

I don't think the willingness to take low-wage, high-influence jobs is in any way unusual. Most people probably prefer it to the opposite scenario. There is no shortage of people trying to make it as journalists, lawyers (yes -many lawyers have relatively low wages now), or teachers.

Anonymous said...

Richard Spencer on Zombies and Jewish Anxiety.

Anonymous said...

Pacific Rim a failure. Del Toro not even Michael Bay. White Women and gays love Elba but I repeat myself but White guys fled TV and movies for gsmes long ago. Mexican Del Toro can't understand American audience.

Not Jews but women. Parker good example. Class and hate hate hate of beta and lower classes animate her social climbing. Jews not appealing to social climbing women which is most. Rather Black then gay then hispanic.

Elba being pushed for Bond, if so series is dead. Most White guys view Black guys as threat and competitor even if never verbalized.

Whiskey

bjdubbs said...


"I really can't understand how such a mediocrity can be syndicated when there are so many great bloggers out there who don't get a dime for their writing"

She is most widely syndicated columnist in the US.

Anonymous said...

Zombies first appeared as moral accusers to condemn violence, but all the later zombie movies instigate humans to commit violence.

http://www.fright.com/edge/j'accuse!_1919.htm

Anonymous said...

She is most widely syndicated columnist in the US.


Way way wait. Hold it. You better check that that's not entirely accurate. By what factors?

Because she's a conservative woman? Then Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin have a higher readership than her.

By influential paper? Richard Brooks and Ross Douthat at the NYT are highly syndicated so what's that prove?

You better check that. Her names not usually among the first five you hear among quoted conservative columnists. Regarding conservative following, Rush Limbaugh probably has a larger following.

So again, there's a wee bit of inaccuracy poping out of the charts

PS You could also throw in Peggy Noonan (same generation) as someone who rivals her in readership syndication.

But agreed with rest of piece. Kinda bland, boring. Her writing's not that particularly special and doesnt really stand out as "great" or "creatively ineresting" etc. whether as a conservative or as a woman columnist in particular.

Sorta would put her in that Mona Charen class: An columnist who's there, but there's really nothing unique about her. She's had her time (sort of) and the moment and generation has passed her by.

What's she known for? What unique ideas and/or issues is Parker known for that are distinctly hers as opposed to Coulter, Malkin, Douthat, even Noonan?

See? Few here can name any. She's not all that.

Whiskey said...

Now back on my regular computer, not my Nook HD + (great for reading articles on the go, poor for commenting).

I would take issue with Steve's contention we need more "smart people" who are cynical on our side. That's not the problem. We need more POWER on our side. That's the problem.

The thread running through Steve's commentary is that gullible/naive WASPs get taken to the cleaners by unscrupulous guys like Soros, Murdoch, Schumer, Kennedy, Obama etc. That's not true in that you can't cheat an honest man. The thread running through the commentary is "its the Jews! you moron! The Fuhrer could dance your pants off! What was the question again?"

The reality is POWER is aligned for pushing the Third Worldization of the West. Look at Guillermo Del Toro -- his Pacific Rim movie was behind an ADAM SANDLER MOVIE with Kevin James and Chris Rock and David Spade. Yes, SANDLER beat the Kaiju. But De Toro > Sandler because it is all about globalization and global take not American audiences. Jack Warner and Louis B. Mayer did not sit around and say, "hey what America needs is 20 Million Catholic, Jew-hostile Mexicans." Meanwhile WASPs like Brooks and Parker can't get enough of them.

What is wrong with the West, from Sweden to America, is two main and inter-related things. One is the rise numerically of the elites, the powerful, the upper class to about a third of all Whites. Measured in power over other people's lives not money. A Lesbian College Administrator making $110K a year has far more power over people's lives than a million a year income oil field services owner. Just like an impoverished Knight had far more power than a Jewish banker in the Middle Ages.

The other inter-related issue is the growth of power and independence of women, who outside the upper class (it takes a power couple to afford the Hamptons and make Summer a verb rather than a season) don't need a beta male husband, are filled with resentment towards the White guys who are their manifestly unsexy equals (and are unsexy because they are equal). And would rather have Eat-Pray-Love here than be bothered to go out and travel to find it. It is women not men who watch Oprah (and Ellen), who prefer having Lesbians around than geeky White guys, who give power to non-Whites, to gays, to Lesbians.

The anti-Semitism is stupid and harmful because it avoids discussion of the real problem, the growth of elites and the related growth of women's disconnection from men (much of the elite is female, unlike Medieval elites). Anti-gay, anti-semitic rantings don't matter because the POWER all swings hard left and Third-Worldizing.

Because Elites and Women want to stop, because as Robert Redford says, in effect, ordinary White guys change things and overturn elites:

"Ware in a dire situation; the planet is speaking with a very loud voice. In the US we call it Manifest Destiny, where we keep pushing and developing, never mind what you destroy in your wake, whether its Native American culture or the natural environment.

"I've also seen the relentless pace of technological increase. It's getting faster and faster; and it fascinates me to ask: how long will it go on before it burns out."

Whiskey said...

As for Mickey Kaus, I admire the guy speaking the truth, but the truth does not set you free. Power does. Kaus can see the disaster, as can really Hollywood, hence all the Zombie and Disaster and End of the World movies. But no one wants to change it.

White women, of their own accord, made Oprah a billionaire. Why? Because they want to desperately believe in Oprah's magical Blackness wisdom to re-order their lives. White women, of their own accord, swooned over Obama like Parker and Sandra Fluke did. Why? Because they wanted to believe (as did Peggy Noonan and the feminized Chris Matthews and David Brooks).

All that (White guy driven) technology has upended Western society from one part to the other; women working/living outside the home; men being unsexy because they are equals (and men being unsexy is the only sin women do not forgive, ever). Women's independent income and elites being far more female and of course, gay and lesbian.

Consider the lesbian coterie in UC. That would have been unthinkable in say, even 1960's UC. But today no one even notices. Why? Because today's elites, unlike the medieval to 1960's elites, are explicitly anti-White guy, and driven by female animus as much as a desire to stop technological advance.

The Central Equation in the West is:

White Women + Gays + Lesbians + Non-Whites = Elites > Ordinary White guys.

That's it. That's the Tragedy of the West. That coalition is built on "enough" new technology coming out despite the anti-White guy jihad by the Napolitanos and Redfords and Parkers to sustain the coalition of the useless, the non-wealth producing classes who exercise power (on the street, ala Trayvon Martin, and at UC, ala Janet Napolitano) but have no ability. That coalition will hold, it has proven extraordinary resilient, until total collapse, which World War Z, Pacific Rim, Walking Dead, White House under attack movies, End of the World movies and books and series all envision with one metaphor or another. Hunger Games and Falling Skies and Resistance and Elysium and so on.

But that's the central tragedy of the West (raising women to be equal to men without making men so sexy the lack of social gap does not matter and women don't seek out dominance like a starving person chocolate).

White Women + Gays + Lesbians + Non-Whites = Elites > Ordinary White guys.

Anonymous said...

So the answer is that to defeat all the eevul amazonian womynz, we need an army of fake Scots-Irishmen who quote Robert Redford?

Is this like a parody of a parody of a parody?

Or is it a parody of a parody of a parody of a parody?

I'm kinda confused - I prefer my surrealism in much smaller doses than that.

Thanks.

Melendwyr said...

I would take issue with Steve's contention we need more "smart people" who are cynical on our side. That's not the problem. We need more POWER on our side. That's the problem.

How do you think people get power? What, you think the Ashkenazi just stumbled over a discarded bottle of POWER one day and turned it into influence? They got it by being smart.

Of course, you need a threshold level of brains to be able to recognize that... so it's understandable that you wouldn't.

Anonymous said...

Well, the drivers license is no big deal since many drive to work without it or car-pool or walk or ride a bike or use public transportation. You can a be conservative Republican governor that takes away drivers license but the illegals get to work anyway. Just use e-verify or punished employers.

Anonymous said...

don't think Ms. Parker is being disingenuous here. She's just got it stuck in her head that "amnesty" is what some Democratic extremists want, while "a path to citizenship" therefore must be the moderate compromise between the liberal la-la land of "amnesty" and the horrors of "self-deportation" (i.e., going home).
Isn't the language of the Republican elite, sometimes I think Kevin McCarthy from Bakersfield that is in the pocket of Big Agricultural is worst than even Jerry Brown. Brown a Dem and he makes things more expensive for the illegals while McCarthy doesn't. Brown is honest about supporting them while Representative McCarthy is not is honest about supporting amnesty.

eah said...

Amnesty is being allowed to stay and work legally -- roughly equivalent to a green card. Citizenship means being able to vote.

It's been pointed out that most illegals are more interested in the former than the latter. Which I can believe.

What I'm not sure of: are green card holders disadvantaged vis-a-vis family reunification? Meaning as compared to citizens?

In any case, thinking about in a 'no taxation without representation' sense, it's clear that eg ethnic lobbyists would never accept non-citizen status for long.

So practically speaking amnesty means citizenship.

It seems some sort of amnesty/citizenship will pass eventually. The country does not seem to have the stomach for enforcement and attrition. In fact it is not even discussed anymore.

Sad.

Anonymous said...

"I've also seen the relentless pace of technological increase. It's getting faster and faster; and it fascinates me to ask: how long will it go on before it burns out."


And what's Bobby's carbon 'print? Exactly. Another typical lib with phony croca tears over how bad US is and how oh so good the Indians are. Is he a scientist? No. A climatologist? No Yet he's given credence to push and pimp out his latest trash about heroic US terrorists were for what they did in the 70s.

Hey, he can do his part, lead by example and stop making films and defund the Sundance festival. Those productions are taking waaay too much of a carbon footprint already. Defund them, lead by example. Quit making films and help save the planet by not using the latest technology which ultimately in his worldview, is only harming the natural environment.

Zoink said...

"How does the 'strong anti-Semitic and anti-gay tone' deter crafty cynicism, exactly?"

It deters Jews and gays directly from helping the alt right, who are, as I stated as "anon", much more likely to be influencers of both elite and popular opinion. It also deters an even larger group who have gays and jews as close friends and family.

Two examples are Krugman moving from the center in the 90's to the left, and Andrew Sullivan moving from the right to the center-left. Krugman even used to be on Steve's HBD list-serv!

The GOP needs 60% of the white vote to win these days, and that number goes up each year. You want to write off these two large and important blocs?

OK, come up with a way to get 70% then. I'd love to hear your plan. You don't have one of course, you'd rather just take random potshots that turn off potential allies.

There's also the little fact that antisemitism and homophobia are stupid and wrong, and nearly absent among elites.

"And the Scots-Irish meme is anti-Whiskey."

That is its origin, but 95% of the time it is used without any reference to him in a stupid anti-semetic comment.

Whiskey's strange white-women-suck trolling, in any event, is best ignored. He seems to be someone who watches massive amounts of television and whose break with reality gets worse each day.

Zoink said...

"She is most widely syndicated columnist in the US."

Could be right, but for a long time it was Cal Thomas, who is ignored on the Internet but in a billion small town newspapers, with George Will right behind him.

Newspaper circulation is going down 8% a year, and newspapers themselves are getting really thin, so the issue will soon be irrelevant. Top tier newspapers like the LA Times, USA Today, Washington Post are now much thinner than 4th tier papers like the Des Moines Register when I was a kid in the 90's. Detroit doesn't even have a daily paper anymore, and several more big city papers are only surviving as loss-making vanity projects of local billionaires, for example the San Diego Union Tribune.

Zoink said...

"smartass Jews who also can be trusted not to stab their goyish allies in the back."

Oh yes, it is Jews who are known for their mass killing of gentiles. Oh wait...

Anonymous said...

"White boys are swooning about Idris Elba in PACIFIC RIM. He makes them feel like wussy jungle feverish white girls"

The only one in this equation homoerotically drooling over black men is you.

And yes if the alt-right wishes to succeed they also must send guys like the above commentator to the fetish sites where they belong.

Gloria

Zoink said...

"[Jews and gays] are two groups that have much higher than average verbal skills, plus the willingness to relocate to large cities where policy and elite opinions are made, plus the willingness to take low-wage high-influence jobs.
-
MmmmK, but noticing those facts generally wins you the anti-Semitic homophobia prize. Maybe if you are a gay Jew in the midst of praising both groups for their invaluable contributions to our national policy debate you can avoid it, but maybe not."

There have been all sorts of discussion in elite media about Jewish high-IQ genes, as well as elite university research. You just to have take a circumspect and respectful tone. It truly isn't that hard. Steve Hsu does it and he is not only an elite academic, he recently was promoted to a high-level university administrative position.

To take another example, saying Hispanics have lower IQs than whites and asians flat-out in elite circles is crossing the line.

What you can say, however, is they have persistently low income and educational outcomes, and push back against their supposedly entrepreneurial bent. That's won't make you friends with the left necessarily, but it won't get you Richwined either.

To take another example, when Marco Rubio types start to go on about how hispanic immigrants are social conservatives, rebut this with their illegitimacy rate is 53%.

Whiskey said...

Last add on this. Mickey Kaus exists "outside" the social climbing bubble of the Gentry Liberals, the Superzips, the elite, whatever you call them, and Kathleen Parker does not. Parker's ability to be a big cheese and a go-to media Conservative like David Brooks depends on parroting the class received wisdom and dogma of Western thought post 1945.

Mickey Kaus does not -- as a true independent, he makes his living and social stir by NOT repeating the dogma. That does not make necessarily Kaus better at say, Calculus than Parker. But it does give him a different motivation every morning.

Anonymous said...

Noah1Note, you must be working for Dees... Hey, why not channel that literary frustration into staging a traveling production of "Portnoy's Complaint?" It's the part you were born to play

Anonymous said...

"Bill" said...
the Scots-Irish meme is anti-Whiskey

Oh, well that explains that. Thanks for cluing in the rest of us on your special treehouse handshakes, champ.

Anonymous said...

Too bad the Martin-Zimmerman trial didn't happen prior to the 2012 election. It would have been funny as hell.

obama's son vs the brown white man.

Anonymous said...

Conservatives had a golden opportunity to use the Zimmerman-Martin controversy to discuss the racial differences in physical power, i.e. the reason why so many blacks act like thugs toward other races is because evolution made them naturally tougher and stronger.

But the opportunity was lost once again.

gubbler of the church of reformed chechenism said...

One can understand why the Jewish elites are letting blacks run wild with the Trayvon thing.

Democratic Party mainly caters to Jews, homos, and 'creative' urbanites, and blacks have been shunted to the back of the bus(unless one is a fancy mulatto or a token.)
Also, places like NY use stop-and-frisk to control lots of blacks. And liberals have been pushing for massive immigration, which means that blacks like the Martin family will be squeezed out by those who look like Zimmerman.

So, there's a lot of grumbling among blacks at gentrification, racial profiling, and the rising number/power of Hispanics; and white liberals and Jews have been at the forefront of all these vast social changes.

So, letting blacks rant at Zimmerman is a convenient way to let blacks feel that they are still empowered and still matter. Also, as Zimmerman has been labeled as a 'white guy' in the south, the whole controversy lets off the hook the northern whites who are into policies like stop-and-frisk that has alienated a lot of blacks. And since zimmerman is lower-middle class, it lets off the upper middle class northern liberals who don't have to deal with the same problems that lower middle class whites and Hispanics must deal with.

Through the zimmerman thing, blacks can let out their spleen at all the elements of white privilege that they don't like: urban gentrification and driving out negroes. racial profiling. swelling rise of hispanics.

But since zimmerman has been labeled as 'white' or 'white hispanic' down in the south, we can all pretend that it's all about blacks being angry with southern white culture.
And yet everything blacks are bitching about in this case has more to do with what northern liberals are up to. Northern liberals have pushed for massive immigration that will further erode black power. Northern liberals have pushed for 'progressive' law and order that calls for 'scientific' stop and frisking of likely suspects. Northern liberals have called for rapid and swift justice to lock up lots of dangerous blacks.

Everything that blacks are angry about with northern white liberals has been conveniently shunted on the shoulders of a chubby 'white hispanic' man.
But then, if someone with a blanket at Oberlin can be the grand wizard of the KKK, I suppose a pudgy Hispanic who shot an attacker to save his own life could be Adolf Hitler.

Anonymous said...

Looks like Zimmerman's in trouble:

"Zimmerman jury asks for 'clarification' on manslaughter charge"

http://news.yahoo.com/zimmerman-jury-asks-for--clarificaton--on-manslaughter-charge-221141455.html

"After more than 12 hours of deliberation, the jury in the George Zimmerman case has asked the court for "clarification" on the charge of manslaughter. The question is likely to make the defense nervous, since it suggests the all-female jury could be seriously weighing a conviction on the lesser charge in the case."

Marc B said...

What I've surmised is that this has been nothing but a good cop republicans vs. bad cop democrats drama played out to see how many suckers in the House (and their constituency) can be conned. By passing such an extreme bill in the Senate, the House gets to show how much they are sticking up for the interests of the native born population by removing the most egregious of it's provisions while still passing a stripped down amnesty bill that would have never made it through in 2007.

Obama gets to go back to the La Raza wing of his base and tells them "this bill is not perfect, but no major legislation is...", while the republicans tell their constituents that something "had to be done for the 11 million living in the shadows..." Regardless of what a final bill looks like that passes, it's a major legislative victory for Obama and a screwjob of epic proportions done to the native born US citizens. The republicans payback their Establishment/corporate puppet masters while the democrats increase their voting base.

Anonymous said...

http://www.suntimes.com/21268770-761/chicago-police-go-high-tech-with-facial-recognition-software.html

Stop and frisk?

How about match and catch?

Anonymous said...

" The strong anti-Semetic and anti-gay tone of many of the bloggers and their comments strongly deters this, such as the dumb "Scots Irish" meme in comments here."

The alt-right can't be philo-semetic because one of the core principles of the alt-right is "noticing things that are going on in reality that we are not supposed to notice".

If you notice enough things, you'll start to notice things about powerful jewish individuals. Things that they are doing that are harmful to Europeans and European-Americans.

That alone makes you an anti-Semite by some popular definitions, but let's assume a more conservative definition.

Because you are required to notice things about reality to be in the alt-right, you're really rather limited in terms of the positions you can take on this issue, unless you are willing to compromise the quality of your analysis.

Steve-style "neutrality" and hinting is really the best that you can do.

Even Moldbug can only say "well, the West was on the way down before Jews arrived, they just sped things up".

Not exactly high praise.

And given what happened with neo-conservatism, I'm not sure how much of that sort of help you want anyway...

Anonymous said...

http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/07/13/3499108/jury-george-zimmerman-not-guilty.html

6 women stood up to the system(even the corrupt legal system).

gubbler of the church of reformed chechenism said...

"The strong anti-Semetic and anti-gay tone of many of the bloggers and their comments strongly deters this, such as the dumb "Scots Irish" meme in comments here."

GOP has been sucking up to Jews for a long long time. So, how do most American Jews feel about the GOP?

If one must be a whore, be a whore to those who appreciate your service.
But mainstream conservatives are whores who get nothing in return.

Bill said...

Did Whiskey just say that David Brooks is a WASP and that much of the elite is female?

Bill said...


@Zoink

Jews and Gays are not large, important voting blocks and are not potential allies of the right. Also, the sky is blue.

Furthermore, it matters not one whit whom the alt.right wants for allies since nobody wants them. Them alt.righters got no voters, no institutions, no money, and no prospects of getting same.

OK, come up with a way to get 70% then. I'd love to hear your plan. You don't have one of course, you'd rather just take random potshots that turn off potential allies.

70% of what? You're trying to talk about elections here, right? A rightist party would need 51% of the overall vote. Eventually, in the US, that would require either disenfranchising significant numbers of non-whites or winning significant numbers of hispanics. This would require, as Steve has explained, convincing hispanics that they want to identify with people they like, white Christians, and not with people they dislike: blacks, Jews, perfessers, and atheists. Sounds a lot easier than winning over gays and Jews to the right, no? For example, an actual rightist party might have used the whole Trayvon thing to drive this wedge.

Increasing the right's share of the white Christian vote is similarly easy. The R's lost the last presidential election because they did poorly among what used to be called Reagan Democrats. Reagan Democrats perceive, accurately, that Rs are out to get them. So, Rs have to stop being out to get them and convince these guys that they have stopped being out to get them.

Now, I can't imagine the R party abandoning their cheap labor, party of the rich schtick. It's been what they are about almost from the beginning. It's where they get their money. So, R has to die before a rightist party can exist. This is pretty likely to happen, though. Demographics is what they is.

Noah172 said...

Zoink wrote:

It deters Jews and gays directly from helping the alt right

What deters those two groups is the fundamental conflict of interest between them and the alt-right.

The alt-right wants a culturally cohesive, overwhelmingly white society. Most Jews see such a state of affairs as leaving them dangerously vulnerable as a conspicuous minority, and conversely see extreme diversity and multiculti as protecting them. Call the Jewish fear understandable and rational, or don't (I don't), but that is the way they see it, and telling them that Mexican and Muslim immigrants don't like Israel doesn't change Jewish minds (at least not among elite Jews).

As for homosexuals, they are uncomfortable with the alt-right's emphases on evolution and white fertility, given that homsexuality is an evolutionary maladaption and is detrimental (from an alt-right perspective) when in engaged in by whites (who will then be childless). And on top of that is the blindingly obvious fact of homosexual promiscuity's public health effects, which alt-rightists, who have no patience for PC lies, have no choice but to point out when the topic of homosexuality arises.

The GOP needs 60% of the white vote to win these days, and that number goes up each year. You want to write off these two large and important blocs?

Important? Yes. Large? No; and in the Jewish case, shrinking. The GOP can certainly win elections writing off the much larger black bloc, and the Democrats have been writing off the still larger white Southern bloc for some time now. What are parties supposed to do to gain the votes of those whose interests and values are so sharply at odds with those of most current party supporters?

OK, come up with a way to get 70% then. I'd love to hear your plan

Go after the middle-to-lower-class, socially moderate, dovish, economically populist whites in the Rust Belt and other pockets who have been voting Dem because the Stupid Party went crazy under Bush.

IOW, go Perot-Buchanan: dial back the warmongering, embrace protectionism, go after Wall Street (break up TBTF, financial transaction tax to pay back bailouts, etc.), think of conservative changes to Obamacare that lower prices for middle-class families (instead of just screaming "socialism!"), etc. Ohio isn't San Francisco: it can be wooed back to the Republicans -- if they pivot away from Bush/McCain/Romney.

And now for the best part:

Oh yes, it is Jews who are known for their mass killing of gentiles. Oh wait...

In the USSR and other European Communist states, Jews did indeed participate in the mass murder of gentiles. Do you anything of this history? Has Hollywood made any movies about it? Have Israel or Bnai Brith made an apology to the peoples of eastern Europe, in the manner that Germany must apologize until the end of time for the Holocaust?

Hepp said...

I once saw Parker on Hardball talking about "racial dog whistles" and how she grew up in the South, so she had a special ability to see all kinds of racism lurking beneath the surface.

So my impression of her has always been a little different than Steve's.

Anonymous said...

Parker grew up in the Orlando area. Not exactly heart-of-Dixie. She has always been fluent/glib in the Acela media argot.

Anonymous said...

To add to what Whiskey said. Our Indian tribes used to kidnap women from the tribe they were warring against in order to turn them into baby factories. I doubt the kidnapped women had too much trouble re-adjusting to their new sex mate-impregnator. She will find a way to love (enough) and live with him. Within six months her previous husband was replaced in her mind. She would mourn the children she left behind (and try to find them the rest of her life) but not the sex partner.

Women are civilizationally (tribally) disloyal this way. This was one reason for racial segregation in our South.

Matthew said...

And very quickly, the MSM turns to slandering the amnesty bills biggest enemy.

From the first two paragraphs of the LA Times article on NumbersUSA: "The day after the Senate passed its immigration overhaul in June, leading opponent Roy H. Beck convened his top strategists at a corner table of a pricey restaurant to discuss what went wrong and to plan ways to stop the bill from becoming law. They brainstormed over rockfish and steak for 2 1/2 hours on how to derail any talk in the House of legalizing millions of undocumented immigrants — which Beck and his supporters view as unacceptable amnesty."

Anonymous said...

My idea would not work since we have a problem with visa overstays. It would reduce illegal immigration in both California and Texas by a million in 5 years. Illegal immigrants in maid work, farm work and nursing care work and landscaping can only stay in the US for 5 years even if their children are American citizens. The kids if they want to stay in the US would have to live with another relative when their parents visa expires if the relative is a permanent resident or wait until age 18 to return. A new group of guest workers and they can't all come from Mexico or Central America but Poland, Philippines and so forth will also be limited to 5 years. The problem is most people on guest worker programs overstay their visas and we have the same old problem until that can be worked out I'm against guest worker programs.

Anonymous said...

The super zips, well both Beverly Hills or Newport Beach want them to make their beds or cut their lawn. Its the small garment factory which is coming back into business from overseas according to USA Today or the Disneyland Hotels or the farmer from Bakersfield who is the hires them like crazy which are the biggest supports of Anmesty.

Anonymous said...

Well, personality, sometimes I wished the Republican Party didn't have to kissed the butt of evangleicals. Bush became president because of evangelical vote. Granted, most are against illegal immirgantionn but that has not been their main issue this is why they voted for Bush still in 2204. I think if Kerry ahd won in 2004 less of a push for legalizaiotn and people didn't like the man that much, so he would have been one term and the Republicans might have gotten away more from the Hispanic pandering and had a better candidnate in 2008 than MCCain.