January 9, 2014

Mitt Romney's black grandson and Glenn Beck's war on "Hetero-Fascism"

I pointed out years ago that Democrats are driven crazy by Mitt and Ann Romney's annual Christmas card featuring all their grandchildren: those Republicans are trying to breed their way to victory. Don't those Aryan crypto-Nazis know that the only legitimate way to win elections is to import foreigners illegally to vote for you?

Now, one of the five Romney sons has adopted a black child. So, when a half-black talking head on MSNBC named Melissa Harris-Perry invited a claque of minor comedians to fill some dead air by making fun of the latest Romney Christmas card, conservatives went nuts in response since there's now a black individual in the Romney family picture for them to defend, allowing them to accuse Harris-Perry of "racism."

Glenn Beck, in contrast, defended Harris-Perry sensibly, saying, "She apologizes, for what? It was a break with comedians."

More generally, interracial and international adoption is a fraught topic since it exposes obvious flaws in the group giving up their children. 

The classic example is South Korea, which was a poor country with little altruism for non-family members. The typical pattern is that nice white people in America find out about a country or culture that doesn't do a good job of taking care of its orphans and they start adopting that culture's unwanted children and giving them good homes. Eventually, the donor country starts to become ashamed by the fact that the American adopters are better people than they are, and decides to get its house in order and do a better job of taking care of its own orphans. 

Being human, the ashamed donor culture lashes out at the evil Americans who are taking their unwanted rejects into their own homes and raising them in an atmosphere of love. But, hopefully, the chastened donor culture gets its act together and does better by its own orphans.

That seems to be going on right now with Russia, for example. After an era of dissolution, the Russians are now ashamed and incensed that they let two perverts in the West adopt a Russian child in 2005 for use in their sick games, and so they are turning against foreign adoptions and have banned gay adoptions altogether

(This Russian ban on homosexuals adopting of course is one of the talking points for the Washington-Wall Street axis that wants to stir up a World War G with Russia. For example, Glenn Beck is jumping on the bandwagon of having a new Cold War, this time over gays:
Glenn Beck Claims He Will 'Stand With GLAAD' Against Russia's 'Hetero-Fascism'

A lot of money was made off the last Cold War. A new one waged against "Hetero-Fascism" sounds like a real geyser of cash for the well-positioned.)

Anyway, part of the Black Pride movement of the 1960s-early 1970s was opposition to whites adopting African-American babies. But this healthy emotional reaction ran into the reality that blacks weren't really ready to go to all the trouble of taking care of all black babies, so this attempt at a ban on interracial adoption fell apart. But that won't stop black people from feeling embarrassed and thus angry at nice white people like the Romney son who adopt a black child.

99 comments:

D. said...

Being a Beck listener, he merely stated that he opposes one prominent
Ruskie's idea that homos should be put in the ovens. And I have never heard him use the term "hetero-Fascim"

Anonymous said...

I think the Romney kid hit the jackpot at an early age. Even without Mitt's centi-millions, the dad (Ben) will be earning a mere $400K+/year chugging away as a radiologist.

OT Steve, can you request the captchas to be dumbed down? My IQ is a mere 140 and most of the time I cannot solve the captchas. I mean, are evil people here stealing millions from your account or something?

phil g said...

I'm not a huge fan of that Beck, or the other Beck for that matter, but I have listened to him enough to find it hard to believe he's going to go all in with the homos versus the Russians. I happen to sympathize with the hard stance that Putan is taking to try to reverse the decadent culture that is destroying the white core of the country. Wish we had some politicians with balls that Putin has.

Anonymous said...

Personally Romney does seem like a nice white person, but politically he is a total neocon tool. If he won the last election, he would have already bombed Iran, inviting a terrorist campaign in response. This would have created more orphans than all the nice white people in the world could ever adopt.

Chicago said...

A few weeks ago the DR of Congo suspended international adoptions. Their Minister of the Interior, RM Mangez, stated that they were investigating allegations of abandonment and reports that some children were being "sold to homosexuals". Some Americans are reportedly stuck there now, unable to leave with their acquired children. After the earthquake in Haiti supposed orphans were being brought into the US almost within hours. How they could determine who was what in the chaos that ensued is a good question. I saw a French news broadcast that scanned an empty nursery and reported that the children had been scooped up by child traffickers. There was even a flap regarding an African adoption by Madonna. Seems the child had a father after all who thought the deal was for her to borrow the child to feed and educate him, not that it was to be permanent.
I've seen a number of lesbian couples with black children in strollers and wonder how and where they're acquiring them. I also wonder how psychologically twisted the child will be when it gets older. It's just human trafficking of children and should be curbed.

Anonymous said...

I'm not a Beck fan but when you cite a Huffington Post blurb as your rock-solid proof of him fielding a gonzo opportunistic alliance with the Homintern that's really pushing it, Steve.

Steve Sailer said...

Watch the video at:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/02/glenn-beck-russia_n_4531744.html

Or is that a Beck impersonator in the video?

Anonymous said...

TBQH, I always thought Beck was a little light in the loafers himself.

Anonymous said...

This is actually a good point that Steve inadvertently backed into.

Why exactly should blacks be happy and content that whites are adopting "their" children?

Example: You almost NEVER (or seldom ever) see black couples adopt a white child.

Wonder why? What is it that they know that whites dont know?

Yet there are white couples who will adopt black children. It must be along the reasoning that "well, if we were to adopt a white child, where's the fun of that? After all, if we wanted a white child, we'd simply have on the natural way."

Jodie Foster, for one, actually did a remarkable thing by consciously adopting a white child AND by consciously adopting for IQ as well.

A rarity among white couples looking to adopt since none of them ever weigh the child's IQ into their thinking. You can't actually "see" a baby's IQ and the results become apparent much later.

But a white couple consciously adopting a white baby is just seldom done any more.

stari_momak said...

I like how the Romney’s literally marginalized their own white, flesh and blood babies. Shows just where the GOP is at.

Whiskey said...

Which Beck? The rocker or talk tv guy? Putin saw Bruno and is putting a stop to the Gayby stuff. Good for him. Poor OJ.

Bruno was much funnier that Borat.

Anonymous said...

I got to wondering about how often, and under what circumstances, a working person meets the 1%, or 5%.

I met Meg Whitman once when she was at Ebay and running for governor. She had the most enormous head I have ever seen on a woman (or man, now that I think about it). Also, her choppers were huge, and scary.

But, many specialist doctors make big bucks. So, for most people, the usual time they meet the 1-5% is when their body need fixing. (In California, you will prob. interact with the top 5% if you get arrested.)






D. said...

i stand corrected. But being libertarian leaning, kinda is fascism to put your enemies in an oven no?

Anonymous said...

I saw your Huffington video. The shelf life of this GLAAD-Beck alliance is about 10 minutes beyond the duration of the clip. The two "news analysts" don't care; for his part Beck is running his mouth to pad out an interview about the now-ancient Duck Dynasty tiff. I'm actually now laughing that Sailer seems to think he's uncovered the gay-rage equivalent of the Zimmerman telegram here.

Bert said...

"But a white couple consciously adopting a white baby is just seldom done any more."

Where exactly are couples supposed to get white children? I'm sorry, but have you not been paying attention to anything that's happened in the past forty years? Gone are the days when poor peasants in Greece and Eastern Europe would have excess children they'd be glad to pawn off to loving Westerners. The vast majority of orphans in the international system come from Africa, and the ones that don't come from South Asia or Southeast Asia.

Say your going to adopt a child basically means your going to adopt a brown child.

Auntie Analogue said...


Glenn Beck is famous...why? In my opinion, for the same reason Kim Kardashian and all the other Big Nothing celebs who are famous for being famous.

One awful mass cult is that of...As Seen On TV!

anony-mouse said...

1/ Russia is banning all foreign adoptions, not just to gays. As to Russia or the DRC being better to its orphans, when was this?

2/ 'Putin is trying to reverse the decadent culture that is destroying the white core of the country'.

Undecadent Putin cheated on his wife numerous times with floosies.

Also for all those who think how wonderful Frank Gorshin is:

He hasn't put stopped the Jihadist bombings and attacks (but at least he put those dangerous Georgians in their place!)

His Russia can't create a single major tech company.

Alcohol consumption still high, male life expectancy and birthrate still low.

But at least he's outsmarted the world's best teleprompter reader.

Abroad he's Alexander III. At home he's Nicholas II.

Anonymous said...

I can't for the life of me understand why somebody would adopt a child of another race.

As for the whole Russian-gay thing, where does America get off telling Russians what their views and values must be?

Also that one poster was bang on. I can barely see what the stupid things are I am supposed to type in to prove I am myself.

Anonymous said...

Also for all those who think how wonderful Frank Gorshin is:

He hasn't put stopped the Jihadist bombings and attacks (but at least he put those dangerous Georgians in their place!)

His Russia can't create a single major tech company.

Alcohol consumption still high, male life expectancy and birthrate still low.


You're Jewish though. You have different standards.

Regarding the jihadist attacks, we've had ongoing jihadist attacks by minorities against the white majority for decades.

Regarding their tech, their military and aerospace tech is still pound for pound some of the best in the world, rivaled only by US tech, and often better than US tech, which nowadays even has Chinese parts for things like the F-35.

Their native birthrate is rising.

Anonymous said...

" Anonymous said...
I can't for the life of me understand why somebody would adopt a child of another race."

Seriously. There are no white babies to adopt. They have all been aborted.

The vast majority of babies who have not been aborted are in Asia and Africa. If you cannot have a child and you desperately want to parent, there is little choice.

Matra said...

Islamofascism, Liberal Fascism, now Heterofascism. Mussolini seems to have come up with the most diabolical and flexible totalitarian ideology ever.

Personally Romney does seem like a nice white person, but politically he is a total neocon tool. If he won the last election, he would have already bombed Iran

He also thinks Putin's Russia hosting the Olympics violates the spirit of the Games. So I guess it is just like in 1980 when Moscow was occupying Afghanistan. Thank goodness when Romney presided over Salt Lake 2002 there was no corruption that violated the Olympic spirit or anything as sordid as a US occupation of Afghanistan.

Anonymous said...

to anony-mouse said,,,

I bet you feel real right and smug taking cheap shots at Russia huh?

Lets give America some of its 20th century history.

The USA....

is defeated in a war with Japan in 1905. Its whole fleet destroyed.

A revolution and a counter revolution.

Several million Americans killed in 1914-17. Much American territory occupid by the Central Powers.

A Bolshevik takeover of America followed by a civil war.

Millions of Americans killed in the midwest and plains states during collectivization. Millions more worked to death in gulags in the Dakotas.

Then a war that kills 27 million Americans and destroys 10,000 towns and villages in the USA.

I'd like to see what America would look like after all this. Look how unglued the USA became just during the Vietnam war era.

Anonymous said...

>>"Where exactly are couples supposed to get white children? I'm sorry, but have you not been paying attention to anything that's happened in the past forty years? Gone are the days when poor peasants in Greece and Eastern Europe would have excess children they'd be glad to pawn off to loving Westerners. The vast majority of orphans in the international system come from Africa, and the ones that don't come from South Asia or Southeast Asia.

Say your going to adopt a child basically means your going to adopt a brown child."






Uh, EXCUSE ME....White couples can adopt white babies from AMERICAN orphanages! Like, duh!

You DO KNOW that America still has plenty of orphanages, right? You don't have to actually go across the world in search of finding the ideal child to adopt, right?

You do understand that you can actually adopt children from this country, right?

That includes white babies.
What's so hard to understand about that?

How about, adopt from YOUR OWN COUNTRY?

You know what you're getting that way.

agnostic said...

"I can't for the life of me understand why somebody would adopt a child of another race."

Same reason they would spend two years in the prime of their life missionizing to the poor benighted heathens. The White Man's Burden, the Scramble for Africa -- international liberal do-gooderism were hallmarks of the stuffy Victorian era. Mormons are no different.

Saxons and Scandinavians seem particularly susceptible to this style of international relations. Boatloads of Somalis were brought into Minnesota and Utah -- and Sweden. It doesn't matter where the blond people are, they have a soft spot for importing dark-skinned neighbors (and getting harassed by them for all their troubles).

"Utah's per-capita share of residents with ancestral links to the tropical Pacific isles of Tonga, Samoa, Hawaii, Tahiti, Guam, Fiji and to Maori peoples of New Zealand is now the highest in the continental U.S., and behind only Hawaii and Alaska nationwide."

"Large Crip gangs in the Salt Lake metro area include Tongan Crip Gang, Lay Low Crips, Sons of Samoa, Tongan Crip Regulators, Tongan Style Gang, Original Laotian Gang, Salt Lake Posse, and others."

Anonymous said...

on the plus side I have in the past tried to make one or two useless comments, then proceeded to flunk your Asimov-on-a-good-day-level-challenge captchas, then proceeded to reread my comments, and then decided not to post after all, much to the benefit of civilization.

Anonymous said...

"But a white couple consciously adopting a white baby is just seldom done any more."

White babies are expensive... you might as well have your own child rather than adopting.

But if you don't want babies, there's plenty of white kids in social services up for adoption.

If the mormons want to diversify their image they should bring back polygamy and diversify their wives.

J Ro said...

lol@the World War G/World War T coinage, these should become common phrases

Anonymous said...

Any white babies up for adoption are adopted well before birth. Non-wealthy people planning to adopt basically settle on China, at best. Romney's family probably adopted a black kid for cynical reasons, and I suppose deserve some ridicule.

hardly said...

Let's make it clear here that several white americans go out of their way to adopt racially different children. It enrages me when I see do-gooder White families adopting kids from Peru and Ghana. What, like there aren't enough poor hispanic and black kids in the inner cities in America? What, like there aren't any poor white kids in America? International and interracial adoption does have at its core a patronizing attitude of superciliousness on the part of the adopter. Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie's family is basically the modern day equivalent of the big game hunter who would capture trophy kills from different continents to demonstrate his bravery (which counted for status in those days). Except that this time its trophy kids from different continents to demonstrate Brangelina's large-heartedness and liberal piety (which counts for status today).
F you, white american adopters. Stick to your own race and country. If kids in other countries don't have enough xboxes, well too bad for them.

I'm sure more than a few eyebrows would be raised if wealthy Arab Sheiks and Indian dynastic billionaires and African politicians started adopting poor white kids from Mississippi.

Matthew said...

Gee - allowing gay couples to adopt seems like a really great way to get Third World countries to stop sending us their unwanted. How can that be bad?

Are Americans adopting a lot of babies from Muslim countries? We should get word out that many of these babies are going into Christian homes, too.

Example: You almost NEVER (or seldom ever) see black couples adopt a white child.

There is a huge surplus of white couples wanting to adopt (healthy) white children. Those babies get snatched up by white couples, oftentimes before they are even born.

NOTA said...

Is there data about what races, sexes, etc. of kids are most in demand for adoption? I would assume white and Asian kids are in high demand in the US from the evidence of my own social circle, but I don't know for sure even where to look for the numbers.

Anonymous said...

Pat Buchanan is one conservative who actually sees in Putin a guy who is trying to fight for traditional values. Putin is supporting the Russian Orthodox Church and is doing more to promote traditional European values than so-called conservatives in the USA.

Yet many conservatives I speak with say he is a "commie". I don't doubt he probably was a party member, and drank the kool-aid like those in the US do with the multicult. But there is a strong indication that he is not a "commie", but rather a Russian nationalist.

But even if he were a real "commie", so what? Weren't the neocons, at least the older ones who founded the movement, commies? And they were commies when the nation was not. Meaning, they really believed that crap and weren't just nodding in approval to get a job. Yet the GOP welcomed them into the fold. And don't most neocons still support leftwing social issues? Yet neocons are still treated with respect and given cushy jobs in the media while true conservatives like Pat Buchanan are persona non grata.

I am disappointed with Beck on this.

Steve Sailer said...

I'm sorry about the captcha difficulty. I'm not aware of any way for me to dial the difficulty back down -- I can only pick to have it or not have it, and then Google sets the difficulty level.

Anonymous said...

>>"Where exactly are couples supposed to get white children? I'm sorry, but have you not been paying attention to anything that's happened in the past forty years? Gone are the days when poor peasants in Greece and Eastern Europe would have excess children they'd be glad to pawn off to loving Westerners. The vast majority of orphans in the international system come from Africa, and the ones that don't come from South Asia or Southeast Asia.

Say your going to adopt a child basically means your going to adopt a brown child."






Uh, EXCUSE ME....White couples can adopt white babies from AMERICAN orphanages! Like, duh!

You DO KNOW that America still has plenty of orphanages, right? You don't have to actually go across the world in search of finding the ideal child to adopt, right?

You do understand that you can actually adopt children from this country, right?

That includes white babies.
What's so hard to understand about that?

How about, adopt from YOUR OWN COUNTRY?

You know what you're getting that way.

Anony Mouse said...

There's not some magic font of healthy white infants and toddlers in the post Roe and contraception and accepted out of wedlock births era. There are probably ten perfectly lovely qualified pairs of white adoptive parents for every such baby. And delayed childbearing means more women won't be able to have babies on their own.

So you compromise somewhere. Adopt older. Or special needs. Or non white. China was popular in part because you could get kids that were healthy, not addled by drugs, still very young, and not abused by either patents or institutions.

In any functional society there should not be a significant surplus of unwanted and healthy infants and toddlers. It's a bad sign if there are. How many iSteve readers would let their sibling's unwanted infant go up for adoption. I'd raise my brother's or brother in law's unwanted baby in an instant, no questions asked.

Anonymous said...

Cons flipped out over this in imitation of libs as libs flip out over the smallest things.

Anonymous said...

Saxons and Scandinavians seem particularly susceptible to this style of international relations. Boatloads of Somalis were brought into Minnesota and Utah -- and Sweden. It doesn't matter where the blond people are, they have a soft spot for importing dark-skinned neighbors (and getting harassed by them for all their troubles).

No, they're just good conformists that rigidly adhere to the dominant zeitgeist. They'd be good little Nazis if the Nazis were in power.

Anonymous said...

conservatives went nuts in response since there's now a black individual in the Romney family picture for them to defend, allowing them to accuse Harris-Perry of "racism." -Steve

I cannot believe the stance you're taking.

Conservatives cried foul not over "racism" per se, but over liberal hypocrisy: what would MSNBC have done if it had been Fox News to air those jokes? The point was that conservatives can't win, even when they inter-racially adopt.

The blatant double standard and partiality exemplified in this incident is the type of thing that prompts moderate liberals and potential swing voters to snap out of the spell they're under and remove the wool from their eyes.

Anonymous said...

"Undecadent Putin cheated on his wife numerous times with floosies."

Who cares? It's probably not even in the top 20 bad things he's done. But he's a fighter for traditional values and that's what matters.

CJ said...

"Jodie Foster, for one, actually did a remarkable thing by consciously adopting a white child.."

Huh? Jodie Foster adopted a child? When did that happen?

BTW, poster Matthew makes a good point that gay adoptions may well bring a quick end to international adoptions.

Anonymous said...

"Being a Beck listener, he merely stated that he opposes one prominent
Ruskie's idea that homos should be put in the ovens."

It would be a lot more useful for all concerned if the Russkie's or Chinese used their freedom from PC to research the idea that there is some kind of bug or virus involved in creating homosexuality.

#

Putin is trying to increase the native Russian birthrate.

The Western elites are working hard to replace their majority populations.

The Western elites are hostile to Putin.

I sense a pattern here.

Anonymous said...

anony-mouse
Most people, even the most conservative ones, are aware that many heads of states have a tendency to have affairs, nobody gets upset about this.

I know that for liberals like you hypocrisy and racism are the worst crimes there can be, but for others things like openly wanting to replace ones own native population and a general tendency to destroying ones culture are much worse.

Anonymous said...

And let us not forget the role Greater Russian chauvinism is playing in all this. One of the main crusaders in Russia's cultural war on "decadent" west is Children's rights commissioner Pavel Astakhov, who is interested mainly in increasing Russian domination in neighbouring countries. He is very loathed figure in Finland. He and his "fans" claim e.g. that the Finns "kidnap" Russian children and force them to become protestants (probably he does't know that orthodox church is the second "state church" of Finland). He has also demanded that Finland allows Russian officials to control Finnish child protection (apparently Russian child protection is SOOO much better).

Viral Architect said...

the only legitimate way to win elections is to import foreigners illegally to vote for you...

And subsidize their breeding when they're in the country.

Muslim Birth-Rates In Great Britain, And What It Means

Peter the Shark said...

Pat Buchanan is one conservative who actually sees in Putin a guy who is trying to fight for traditional values.

Buchanan is delusional. Putin is an unrepentant Stalinist. He is a trained KGB Agent, and Stalin is the model for success. To be fair, Stalin was also for "traditional values" and cracked down on homosexuality, sexual freedom and other decadence once he took control of the Communist Party. But he was not a Great Russian nationalist, and neither is Putin. Their ideology is "all power to the state". Putin wants a powerful Russian state, with hard working sober obedient citizens. He doesn't particularly care if those citizens are ethnic Russians, and if Tatars and Bashkirs and other Muslims are more sober and more hard working than Russians, he will continue to support those groups to the detriment of ethnic Russians, as he does now.

Anonymous said...

What happened the last time a Russian leader posed as the hero of conservatism? Anyone stupid enough to buy it found out that it was simply a thin wrapper around Russian imperialism.

Putin is close with Berlusconi, which should tell anyone that old Dobby the KGB elf has a private life that, to put it mildly, it's terribly conservative. Bunga-Bunga!

Then there's the way he recently discarded his wife..after years of cheating on her with lots of women. (Among others, Anna Chapman has been linked with Vova-which may explain wy, after she proved to be an incompetent spy, she came back to Russia and was given all sorts of bennies.) Alina Kabaeva is his baby momma, and she's probably not the only one.

I love how Putin poses as a traditionalist conservative. He's a gopnik, through and through-and people like Pat Buchanan and Peter Hitchens can't seem to see through it. How can you get paleocons to buy a con from a chav? Drape that chav in a paleocon suit, and they will rush to become fellow travelers.

-Smert Gopniki

Hunsdon said...

Matra said: Islamofascism, Liberal Fascism, now Heterofascism. Mussolini seems to have come up with the most diabolical and flexible totalitarian ideology ever.

Hunsdon said: How does it feel to WIN THE INTERNET? Best comment in . . . a while.

Anonymous said...

I wonder if adoption into a white family will have an effect on this child's IQ. I wonder if there are studies on black children adopted into white families. You would think, on average, that they would perform better on various tests since their adoptive parents must come from fairly well-to-do communities and imbue them with the secret white society that testers rely on when writing… wouldn't you?

Anonymous said...

"on the plus side I have in the past tried to make one or two useless comments, then proceeded to flunk your Asimov-on-a-good-day-level-challenge captchas, then proceeded to reread my comments, and then decided not to post after all, much to the benefit of civilization."

No. No. Put on the reading glasses. Persevere until you type the shibboleth. Publish and be damned. Everyone does.

Gilbert P

Anonymous said...

"conservatives went nuts in response since there's now a black individual in the Romney family picture for them to defend, allowing them to accuse Harris-Perry of "racism." -Steve

I cannot believe the stance you're taking.

Conservatives cried foul not over "racism" per se, but over liberal hypocrisy: what would MSNBC have done if it had been Fox News to air those jokes? The point was that conservatives can't win, even when they inter-racially adopt.

The blatant double standard and partiality exemplified in this incident is the type of thing that prompts moderate liberals and potential swing voters to snap out of the spell they're under and remove the wool from their eyes."

Google leftist ju-jitsu. Pointing out endless hypocrisy is amusing but it does not help. White people purporting to be blacker-than thou are just embarrassing.

Gilbert P

Anonymous said...

My sister just paid over $60,000 to adopt the child of a Guatemalan who is currently being deported in slow motion (as in, they ordered the deportation a year ago and gave her a bracelet thingy, but it's still working its way through courts . . . or something).

Not a penny of that money went to the mother. My sister and her husband had been working with various semi-scam agencies for the past few years.

Also, the baby has a cleft palate and is suffering some sort of gastrointestinal ailment.

The Anti-Gnostic said...

I wonder if adoption into a white family will have an effect on this child's IQ. I wonder if there are studies on black children adopted into white families

The one surly, obese, deep-voiced five-year old I saw with his nice, white fambly didn't seem to have soaked up much. In fact, I foresaw some parents being punched in the mouth at some point. But then, there's lots of variables as liberals never tire of pointing out.

Am I the only one out there who sees adoption as a form of cuckoldry which, more often than not, turns out poorly for everyone involved? MSNBC had a harrowing article on this once, and the comments were also full of tragic experiences.

Anonymous said...

Saxons and Scandinavians seem particularly susceptible to this style of international relations. Boatloads of Somalis were brought into Minnesota and Utah -- and Sweden. It doesn't matter where the blond people are, they have a soft spot for importing dark-skinned neighbors (and getting harassed by them for all their troubles).


I hate to tell you this but originally most Somalians were place in Georgia. Lots of southerners have more soft spots for blacks than northerners sorry but people here complain about the north and Mr Glen Beck is headquarters in Texas which has historically had a soft spot for both blacks and Mexicans.

Matt said...

Uh, EXCUSE ME....White couples can adopt white babies from AMERICAN orphanages! Like, duh!

You DO KNOW that America still has plenty of orphanages, right? You don't have to actually go across the world in search of finding the ideal child to adopt, right?


I've never tried to adopt, but I'm friends with several couples who are trying their hardest. I can say for a fact that the situation in the US is:

1. White
2. Under 6 years old
3. Healthy

Pick any two.

More realistically, that's if you're lucky. If you pick #1, it's more usually a compromise on both of the other two. The supply of babies who are white, healthy, and unwanted by their birth parents exceeds the demand by white Americans looking to adopt by probably two orders of magnitude.

Svigor said...

Gee - allowing gay couples to adopt seems like a really great way to get Third World countries to stop sending us their unwanted. How can that be bad?

What an excellent point! I'll add that to the other benefit homosexuals afford us: shock troops for gentrifying black and brown neighborhoods. I think I see a pattern forming...

'Course, preventing American women from killing their babies in the womb would probably be even more effective.

There's not some magic font of healthy white infants and toddlers in the post Roe and contraception and accepted out of wedlock births era. There are probably ten perfectly lovely qualified pairs of white adoptive parents for every such baby. And delayed childbearing means more women won't be able to have babies on their own.

Whites keep their kids. That's the primary reason it's hard to find white babies to adopt. Blacks abort at a much higher rate, and the black birth rate is barely higher than the white, and there are still more black babies available for adoption, per capita.

How many iSteve readers would let their sibling's unwanted infant go up for adoption. I'd raise my brother's or brother in law's unwanted baby in an instant, no questions asked.

Indeed, this is ubiquitous among whites. It's not uncommon among blacks, either. What's more common among blacks is mothers who don't want to raise their children.

I know that for liberals like you hypocrisy and racism are the worst crimes there can be, but for others things like openly wanting to replace ones own native population and a general tendency to destroying ones culture are much worse.

Oh, please. Leftists are the biggest hypocrites around. There are no leftist "principles" they won't do an about-face on when it suits them, other than identity politics - which in their hands is hypocrisy, writ large.

He's a gopnik

I used to read the Exile. Looking back, I think my favorite part is how those two Jews spent all that time affecting an iconoclastic, ruthlessly honest pose, while ignoring the fact that the "Russian" oligarchs were really Jewish oligarchs.

Mr. Anon said...

"Anonymous said...

I saw your Huffington video. The shelf life of this GLAAD-Beck alliance is about 10 minutes beyond the duration of the clip. The two "news analysts" don't care; for his part Beck is running his mouth to pad out an interview about the now-ancient Duck Dynasty tiff. I'm actually now laughing that Sailer seems to think he's uncovered the gay-rage equivalent of the Zimmerman telegram here."

Steve is merely pointing out that Glenn Beck is an unreliable conservative, or a compromised one, or just not really very conservative at all. Beck throws the term fascist around as recklessly as a Berkeley free-speech protestor in the 60s. He subscribes to the "progressive fascism" meme that Jonah Goldberg promoted - that fascism and naziism were really left-wing movements. This is historical nonsense. It is simply an exercise in hurling the term fascist at anyone you don't like.

I don't like Vladimir Putin: he is an unrepentant secret-policeman - he's a creep. But it is none of our business what Russia's attitude on homosexuality is. Having seen what the homosexualization of our culture has done for us, perhaps they have decided they want to make sure they don't go down that road.

Anonymous said...

NOTA said:

Is there data about what races, sexes, etc. of kids are most in demand for adoption? I would assume white and Asian kids are in high demand in the US from the evidence of my own social circle, but I don't know for sure even where to look for the numbers.

There is data about this. I know this because a leftist Facebook friend of mine posted an article on this subject and then fumed about it. However, I didn't read the article and her Facebook history is too nauseating for me to go through with a fine-toothed comb to find it. All I remember from it is that (this is what she was fuming about) white children were more in demand than black children.

Bill said...

Anonymous said . . .
Uh, EXCUSE ME....White couples can adopt white babies from AMERICAN orphanages! Like, duh!

You DO KNOW that America still has plenty of orphanages, right?


No, we don't know that. Because it is false.

You don't have to actually go across the world in search of finding the ideal child to adopt, right?

No, we don't know that, either. Because it, too, is false.

You do understand that you can actually adopt children from this country, right?

That includes white babies.
What's so hard to understand about that?


White babies from the US cost several tens of thousands of dollars and require a significant waiting period. Foreign babies are cheaper and faster. There are no white babies just lying around waiting for someone to adopt.

You are an abysmally ignorant fool.

pat said...

I hate the homosexual topic because I have to repeat myself.

First of all the stupid term homophobia. In fact I'm afraid of just about every minority group except homosexuals. When I had travel on business I bought my wife a revolver. It wasn't to protect herself from gays. When we moved near the Castro my anxieties fell.

I see that home gun ownership is up. Trust me, it isn't fear of home invasions by homosexuals.

Secondly it's pretty stupid and pointless to kill off gays. Gays don't reproduce. They die off naturally. So those out there who are offended by the thought of buggery don't have to build ovens. It is not analogous to the genocide of the Jews. Kill all the Jews and there will be no more Jews. But homosexuality is probably caused by a micro-organism (most likely T. Gondii). Kill all gays (i.e. those whose mothers were infected when they were pregnant) won't do anything for the next generation. There will just as many gays after your gay holocaust as before.

If you want to get rid of gays - work for a cure. Or not. It is very likely a cure will be found in the natural order of things.

Heterosexual men should just ignore homosexuality. Wait it out.

Albertosaurus

Anonymous said...

"TBQH, I always thought Beck was a little light in the loafers himself."

Nah, I think he's "just" bi-polar.

Anonymous said...

"Jodie Foster, for one, actually did a remarkable thing by consciously adopting a white child AND by consciously adopting for IQ as well."

I have a friend whose niece and her lesbian girlfriend, (or "wife"...they had a marriage ceremony, don't know if they had it in a gay marriage state, though) just delivered a baby conceived in a test tube).

Her aunt is thrilled. I, on the other hand, think it the height of selfishness to choose to "make" a child (in this case, the infant is a boy) whom you know will never know his biological father and will never have any father at all.

This same aunt a few years ago told us she had just gotten back from her niece's wedding, then said, "Not that I'm down on them or anything, but I don't EVER want to spend a couple of days around that many lesbians." She wouldn't elaborate.

Give you one guess the ethnicity of the family...

paleo fail said...

Anonymous said...
Personally Romney does seem like a nice white person, but politically he is a total neocon tool. If he won the last election, he would have already bombed Iran, inviting a terrorist campaign in response. This would have created more orphans than all the nice white people in the world could ever adopt.

1/9/14, 5:39 PM


Good thing he didn't win, thus freeing you up from caring about the basket-case Middle East's orphans. BTW the current mood over there is peace & theological harmony with the occasional spike in grain prices.

Anonymous said...

"Romney's family probably adopted a black kid for cynical reasons, and I suppose deserve some ridicule."

Cynical? Look at who's really cynical.

Anonymous said...

"I can't for the life of me understand why somebody would adopt a child of another race."

Most adoptive parents have little idea of the nature v. nurture results rendered by modern research.

How many people do you know who actually know anything of twin studies of children reared apart?

Americans, with our "can do" attitude, still believe it's nurture over nature.

I've two friends, one who adopted a 7 year old 35 years ago (she was a social worker) who had had several miscarriages, and one a grandma to an adoptive kid who is now 15, and both have told me, they "never realized how little the environment mattered."

If people knew this, adoptions would infrequently.

Cail Corishev said...

There is a huge surplus of white couples wanting to adopt (healthy) white children.

Yeah, I thought everyone knew that it's almost impossible to find a white baby to adopt, thanks to abortion. Your choices are: get a baby from someone you know, like a family member, so the agencies aren't involved; sit on waiting lists for several years and offer bribes to everyone involved in hopes of getting bumped up; or take an older problem child who's been knocking around in foster homes and juvenile detention for several years.

Or you go overseas, to wherever babies are currently most available.

Anonymous said...

Steve is right, though, libs can't stand the idea that there's any avenue by which blacks or other minorities might be persuaded into conservatism.

Anonymous said...

White infants are in very high demand in this country. When I last read about it, 10-15 years ago, it would cost you $12-15K to make the arrangements for a private White infant adoption in California. In addition, a pregnant White girl could demand (through a lawyer) and get free room and board for the term of her pregnancy, plus whatever else she "needed".
Older and/or damaged White kids are what is available to the average adopter. Personally, I'd go for a White Hispanic.

Cail Corishev said...

You DO KNOW that America still has plenty of orphanages, right?

Thank you for visiting us from 1949. Do you have a time machine, or did you do a Rip Van Winkle thing?

Most of the orphanages were closed in the 1950s and '60s, and the few that are left are mostly used for temporary storage while kids are moved between foster families. Abortion also eliminated millions of babies that otherwise might have been available for adoption. There are only something like 100,000 full orphans (missing both parents) in the USA today, and far more couples than that looking to adopt. One stat I found said that for every baby put up for adoption, there are 30-40 couples waiting. (One article said there are 2 million homosexuals/lesbians who want to adopt; they alone would easily snap up all the available American babies.)

I don't doubt that some people specifically seek out a baby of a different race for reasons of ideology or fashion. But most people who do it do so because they simply want a baby, and it's the only way they're likely to get one before they grow old.

Old fogey said...

I realize this is off the main topic, but I really wish people would stop putting their own photos on their Christmas cards. Christmas cards used to celebrate the birth of Christ and show Mary and Jesus. Nowadays all of that seems to have been forgotten. Sad, really.

Anonymous said...

"Washington-Wall Street axis that wants to stir up a World War G with Russia."

--------

Is there any concrete evidence that Wall Street is behind stirring up the gay war with Russia? Or did you say it on the principle that Wall Street must be behind everything?

Matt Buckalew said...

What I love most about paleocons and Russia is the strange dynamic over at TAC where Larison gets down on his knees three times daily for Putin's foreign policy to orgasmic unanmity of the leftists who post at TAC, but let Buchanan utter a peep of plaudits for Putin's domestic policy and those same posters start whining like well paleocons. Not surprising after all since paleocons are a lot more like Charles Beard than they are like Robert Taft. Charles Lindenbeard cons like Larison. It was good to see that the Christie bridge scandal finally gave Larison a domestic issue he felt worthy of his comment, or should I say three comments.


Hitchens's and Buchanan's support for Putin are two different species of support. Hitchens looks around and the encroaching urban chaos of every English city militarized London and say to himself if an authoritarian can set this right screw freedom. Buchanan is just trolling neo-cons and leftists at this point. He doesn't really like Putin he just picks his allies by seeing who the neo-cons and leftists are attacking. It's kind of a childish way to act but our entire public discourse is carried out at the level of a 3rd grade sandbox so its par for the course. The funny thing is that the paleocons are always running their mouths about how American foreign policy creates eternal enemies by intervening in places it doesn't belong. Yet, when it comes to Russia there wasn't an intervention, missile shield, or superflous weapon system Patty B wouldn't support back during the Cold War.

And yea this is a complete cheap shot at Beck, but Sailer basically loaths any conservative who makes more money than him so I'm not surprised.

Reg Cæsar said...

Too busy to look it up now, but is the Romney boy who adopted this kid the same one who paid a surrogate to carry another in 2012?

Art Deco said...

I've two friends, one who adopted a 7 year old 35 years ago (she was a social worker) who had had several miscarriages, and one a grandma to an adoptive kid who is now 15, and both have told me, they "never realized how little the environment mattered."

If people knew this, adoptions would infrequently.


Or maybe your friend is Judith Rich Harris - like: an inept and ineffectual mother who wants to off-load the blame for domestic arguments on the child's genome.

Art Deco said...

It enrages me when I see do-gooder White families adopting kids from Peru and Ghana.

Your bad attitude is not their problem.

Art Deco said...

Personally Romney does seem like a nice white person, but politically he is a total neocon tool.

That's right. A centimillionaire who has turned around who knows how many ailing companies while raising five competent sons (four of whom married young) and then going on to run the Olympics and the Massachusetts state government is a dupe/errand boy of a collection of opinion journalists on the dole of the Bradley Foundation.

Bert said...

Daniel Larison has nothing to do with Steve Sailer. I'm getting sick of idiots bringing him up in threads.

ben tillman said...

My sister just paid over $60,000 to adopt the child of a Guatemalan who is currently being deported in slow motion (as in, they ordered the deportation a year ago and gave her a bracelet thingy, but it's still working its way through courts . . . or something).

Not a penny of that money went to the mother. My sister and her husband had been working with various semi-scam agencies for the past few years.


And:

White babies from the US cost several tens of thousands of dollars and require a significant waiting period. Foreign babies are cheaper and faster. There are no white babies just lying around waiting for someone to adopt.

If you want a healthy White baby, you can just pay a White woman $20,000. And that's if you don't shop around.

Art Deco said...

Too busy to look it up now, but is the Romney boy who adopted this kid the same one who paid a surrogate to carry another in 2012?

No

Anonymous said...

Bert people bring him because he is pathetically punctilious about rejecting any critical posts. Maybe Buckalew shoe horned him in but his criticism were valid. Plus you think at a sight like this a name like Buckalew would at least get some founding stock deference.


Jim Kramer

as said...

Nice photo.

Orange and pink is a great color combination. The coordinated outfits are nice too.

Anonymous said...

...



Biological problems with mixed-race adoption

http://sociobiologicalmusings.blogspot.com/2011/10/problems-with-mixed-race-marriages-and.html



...

Matra said...

Daniel Larison has nothing to do with Steve Sailer. I'm getting sick of idiots bringing him up in threads.

I think idiot (singular) would be more accurate as it appears to be just one obsessed Israel uber alles poster who is constantly bringing up Larison in these threads.

Anonymous said...

There just aren't a lot of healthy white babies up for adoption. Most unwanted babies get aborted. Those who make it to term are often adopted by close family. If there were an unwanted baby in my extended family there's no way in he'll that baby wouldn't be adopted by a family member.

Reg Cæsar said...

Your bad attitude is not their problem. --Art Nouveau

No, their problem is being torn from their village, their clan, their country, their race, where they fit in, and sent to an icy suburb in a distant land overseas where they stand out like an oddity and gain nothing in return for what they have lost other than a chance to earn a lot more money over a lifetime.

Wow. How fortunate of them!

Hepp said...

"Her aunt is thrilled. I, on the other hand, think it the height of selfishness to choose to "make" a child (in this case, the infant is a boy) whom you know will never know his biological father and will never have any father at all."

That makes no sense. The child has two choices
1) Nonexistence
2) Existence, without knowing his natural father

It might be nice to know your father, but not so much that it's better to never have been born if you can't know who he is.

Reg Cæsar said...

[Beck] subscribes to the "progressive fascism" meme that Jonah Goldberg promoted - that fascism and naziism were really left-wing movements. This is historical nonsense. --Mr Anon

Those were centrist movements. But since they were to the left of Beck (and almost every other Republican in US history, and most Democrats for that matter), he naturally sees them as leftist.

That's not "historical nonsense", it's a mild case of myopia.

Reg Cæsar said...

That makes no sense. The child has two choices
1) Nonexistence
2) Existence, without knowing his natural father
--Hepp (as in "hepatitis"?)

The child "has" those choices because they were foisted upon him by a couple of self-centered dykes. His ideal choice-- knowing and being reared by his natural father-- was cruelly withheld from him, by a conspiracy of so-called adults.

Morally, this is no different from the pregnant mother's taking Thalidomide. That also makes her feel good. The only difference is the damage is more visible with the drug than with the "donation".


It might be nice to know your father, but not so much that it's better to never have been born if you can't know who he is.

That can be used to defend the procuring of a child by any means, including rape, trafficking, and kidnapping. You're in good ethical company there!

A basic assumption of civilized societies is that a parent owes the child the other parent.

Mr. Anon said...

"Reg Cæsar said...

Those were centrist movements. But since they were to the left of Beck (and almost every other Republican in US history, and most Democrats for that matter), he naturally sees them as leftist."

Nonsense. They were right-wing movements. Hitler, Goering, and Himmler can hardly be called "to the left" of Glenn Beck. Historical labels mean something - they are not simply a magic-wand to wave over your enemies so that you win your argument by some kind of semantic trick.

Reg Cæsar said...

Historical labels mean something…
--Mr Anon

A spectrum is by definition one-dimensional. The dimension used by the left/right political spectrum is change. This is how my comp. gov. prof. explained it 30 years ago, and I haven't seen anyone else offer up another standard that made sense.

Left is radical. Right is reactionary. The National Socialist German Workers' Party was both, whichever worked for them at any given moment. That's the very definition of centrism.

Hell, Adolf and his gang believed in-- and benefited from-- both the welfare state and women's suffrage. How radical can you get? They practiced (progressive) eugenics, and even allowed abortion, albeit selectively.

The true right in Germany was monarchist and ultramontane Catholic-- descriptors of many of Adolf's wannabe assassins. Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn published a map that showed NDSAP electoral strength concentrated in the progresive Protestant north and east, and weakest in the hidebound Papist south.

As for American comparisons, name a single issue on which der schöne Adolf was to the right of Robert Taft, Barry Goldwater, or Ronald Reagan.

Anonymous said...

That's right. A centimillionaire who has turned around who knows how many ailing companies while raising five competent sons (four of whom married young) and then going on to run the Olympics and the Massachusetts state government is a dupe/errand boy of a collection of opinion journalists on the dole of the Bradley Foundation.

"Errand boy" isn't actually an inaccurate characterization. Mormonism has more to do with the fact that he raised 5 sons who married young.

Anony Mouse said...

I'm a donor sperm baby. My parents were and are still married to each other, and neither my brother nor I would exist without anonymous sperm donation.

I like my life. I had a happy childhood. But that doesn't make it right that my parents and the medical establishment withheld some pretty vital information from me. It doesn't make anonymous donor materials handed out like candy right.

And I grew up with a wonderful and much loved father! This baby won't. Furthermore, he's going to be told he has no farther and that wanting a father is wrong. I mean, he has two mommies who live him very much! That's obscene. Were I to conceive and my husband to due before our child's birth, nobody would dare say that, even if the scenario is similar. Instead, it would be considered tragic that our child never knew his father. He wouldn't be expected to take comfort in having a loving mommy.

Anonymous said...

Adoption is about an insane and ridiculous level of entitlement. It should be ended in favor of going back to guardianships with respectable local citizens if no relatives can be found.

Not that this is likely, since the Sailer commentariat mirrors the regular world of adoptive whites on the whole feeling entitled to a baby just because they want one and biology has failed them.

Art Deco said...

"Errand boy" isn't actually an inaccurate characterization.

It is, and you know nothing.

ATBOTL said...

Many of the black children up for adoption today are birthed by homeless, crack addicted mothers. That's why there are so many of them, some of the women just have baby after baby that are immediately confiscated. The obvious solution is to implant temporary contraceptive devices in these women, but we can't have any common sense solutions to problems in America.

Anonymous said...

There's about 45k black kids of all ages available for adoption (parental rights severed enough basically), which means there aren't terribly many black American babies either.

Despite all the horror stories, most kids, including most black kids, leave foster care and aren't there very long.

Mostly women (even black women) don't kill their kids or lose them to foster care, not when almost 4 million births a year happen and about 10% of that number is foster care plus abortions annually.

Americans just don't leave a lot of kids available to adopt now that they aren't pressured to.

Miss Carnivorous said...

I gave my daughter up for adoption 9 years ago. I got to pick from among many, many desperate people who had been through hell trying to adopt an American baby of any race. Most of these people know that third world adoptions are frought with problems. The mothers may not really want to give up their children. The officials in third world coutries may be in it to make money and demand bribes etc.. The prospective adoptive couples often get ripped off to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars and still get no baby. Adopting older children is a bad idea. Older kids have been neglected abused have had poor nutrition and have developed cultural and emotional bonds which will damage them to break.

The children available in the US are not of the quality they used to be. In the past, college girls gave up their children in order to have a better life. The children available were white and had superior IQ's. Now white college girls just have abortions.

Even a lot of black crack moms get to keep their babies and the Black social workers divvy out black kids into foster care, often to relatives of the crack moms. It is a business for black people/social workers to make money from and they also get subsidized housing for taking care of foster kids. Here in California blacks have made it all but impossible for whites to adopt black babies or even older kids.

Reg Cæsar said...

In the past, college girls gave up their children in order to have a better life. The children available were white and had superior IQ's. Now white college girls just have abortions. --Miss Carniverous

In I Shared the Dream, Martin Luther King's mistress recounted how she and her husband adopted when they couldn't have their own child.

A rich girl in Westchester County got knocked up by the family's black chauffeur. That baby went all the way to Kentucky to find a home. Whites then (ca. 1960) didn't want a mulatto child, and blacks were either unwilling or unable to adopt.

This woman was a state senator, so we're talking about an early example of a black power couple.

Anony Mouse said...

Miss Carnivorous: Bless you for giving your child up for adoption. That's very brave.

You're right about the type of mothers who give up their babies. My grandmother got pregnant in her teens and gave up the baby. The next time she got pregnant by that man, she married him and had four more kids. My grandparents are both Mensa members, and of the four babies they raised, all are in the top twenty percent of the population. In their only Mensan descendant, but ask the grandkids are very bright. Their children were actually part of a research study.

But even then my grandmother was considered particularly quality. She could tell the adoptive family was well off by the quality of clothing they sent for the infant.

Miss Carnivorous said...

Not to crow too much, but... every xmas the family who adopted my daughter sends me pictures of their family along with an update and they tell me my daughter is known as "their walking encyclopedia" and is narrating her school play due to her superior reading skills. They are proud, proud. I know some of it is due to my genes, but they are wonderful parents. I could not have picked any better. He is a firefighter and she was an orthopedic nurse, but I wanted my daughter raised by a stay at home mom and this lady wanted to be one. Last year in third grade, my daughter
told them she wanted to be a doctor and this year in the forth grade she told them she wanted to be a neuro-surgeon. Here may I let it be known that my daughter is of mixed race, her birth father being half Hawaiian polynesian and half Sri Lankan. No doubt that is where the doctor genes come in. Hopefully her Hawaiian blood will make her more laid back than I am.