tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post2605656242141912144..comments2024-03-29T05:14:33.223-07:00Comments on Steve Sailer: iSteve: The dynastic appeal of Barack ObamaUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger59125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-89269431098369120322008-06-18T15:20:00.000-07:002008-06-18T15:20:00.000-07:00Jews aren't "joining" the race realist movement - ...<EM>Jews aren't "joining" the race realist movement - they are pioneers in it. Ever hear of Richard Herrnstein, Michael Levin, Michael Hart, Arthur Jensen (half-Jew)?</EM><BR/><BR/>Add Hans Eysenck. But it's significant that he did not identify as Jewish, like some of the others in your list. And why not include Steve Sailer? He doesn't identify as Jewish either.<BR/><BR/><EM>Jews are as overrepresented among race realists as they are among race deniers.</EM><BR/><BR/>Not true, and they don't lead race realism as they have led race denial. <BR/><BR/><EM>And the bit about "Jewish interests" is ridiculous McDonaldian nonsense.</EM><BR/><BR/>Then complain to Stephen Steinlight as he argues against the overwhelming Jewish support for mass immigration on the ground that it might not be good for... Jewish interests:<BR/><BR/>Will a country in which enormous demographic and cultural change, fueled by unceasing large-scale non-European immigration, remain one in which Jewish life will continue to flourish as nowhere else in the history of the Diaspora? In an America in which people of color form the plurality, as has already happened in California, most with little or no historical experience with or knowledge of Jews, will Jewish sensitivities continue to enjoy extraordinarily high levels of deference and will Jewish interests continue to receive special protection?<BR/><BR/>http://www.cis.org/articles/2001/back1301.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-67554687912947990562008-06-18T11:31:00.000-07:002008-06-18T11:31:00.000-07:00Obama will win in a landslide.Obama's problem is t...<I>Obama will win in a landslide.</I><BR/><BR/>Obama's problem is that the "bitterest" groups which he's pissed off the most have the potential to swing some very big states, while the groups he's most attracted to his campaign only have the potential to swing two or three small states. Colorado and New Mexico may go his way, but that matters not if he loses Michigan and Pennsylvania.<BR/><BR/>I've long thought that winning with McCain would be bad for the GOP, because it'd show them that they can tick off the working/middle class base on issues like immigration and still get by.<BR/><BR/>But if McCain wins because of working class voters in places like Pennsylvania and Michigan it just may remind them of their original Reagan coalition and how important it is to hang on to these groups - that they don't have to eke out every election 51-49.<BR/><BR/>When Coca Cola decided to give us New Coke back in the early 80s they knew exactly what they were doing and acknowledged that they were changing the product (even if it sucked). What the GOP has yet to acknowledge is that they've replaced their orginal CocaCola-ism with, ahem, NeoCocaCola-ism, and the product sucks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-16228039920051827302008-06-18T05:51:00.000-07:002008-06-18T05:51:00.000-07:00"Obama will win in a landslide.."I think Obama cam..."Obama will win in a landslide.."<BR/>I think Obama campaign runners have their little pinkie marks all over the blogosphere.<BR/> Webster Griffin Tarpley, in my opinion the most brilliant political historian going, has pointed out that Hillary Clinton won more popular votes than any candidate running. The press has been mean to her. Sickening sweet to Obama. I won't mention why since that's another whole story, but it is doubtful he will "win in a landslide." Lose in a landslide more likely, although the vote stealing apparatus is likely more sophisticated than it was in 2000.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-85146865234399746212008-06-18T05:48:00.000-07:002008-06-18T05:48:00.000-07:00"Why, on the so-called conservative websites (like..."Why, on the so-called conservative websites (like Ace of Spades for example) he was made out to be the second coming of George Washington."<BR/> I don't think we are a million miles away from common ground, it's just that I tend to look straight THROUGH the guy up front, because he is rarely, especially in a democracy, the one with real power.<BR/> Believe it or not,there are people paid to sing the praises of people in ostensible power. The payment may be direct or indirect. I doubt any signifcant number (say more than 2%) of individuals really think W is anything but a hand puppet. There are, however, many people who gain from policies promoted by them, through this puppet. For crissake. This has been going on for centuries. There is nobody so willfully, and so unforgivably naive as Americans. Every criminal lawyer knows that crimes may be conspiracies and they always test the water for them. But every major American political crime must absolutely not be a conspiracy but perpetrated by "lone nuts" or the odd criminal. The media has colluded in this attitude increasingly since 1963 and anybody who questions the official line is also a nut. Do you ever wonder why fewer and fewer people own the media? Or why fewer and fewer people bother to read newspapers?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-71926166342172996462008-06-17T22:03:00.000-07:002008-06-17T22:03:00.000-07:00There are people who blame every development since...<I>There are people who blame every development since 1960 they don't like on the Jews</I><BR/><BR/><I>Only</I> the developments since the 60s? Ha! Seems to me there was something happened not long before the 60s that blamed the Jews for lots of other things.<BR/><BR/>Seems to me it's quite possible for a nation of people to shit their own nest even without lots of Jews around. Lots of nations doing that right now, in fact. The question is are nations <I>more likely</I> to shit their own nest because of the presence of (relatively) large numbers of Jews? Are Jews, either through their numbers or, more likely, their outsized intellectual, financial, cultural and political influence, more likely to cause a nation to shit its own nest? That's a reasonable discussion. <BR/><BR/>To blame "the Jews" for making up their minds based on what in their minds is in the best interests of "the Jews" seems to me a bit silly. Surely some very weak minds do: John Podhoretz, etc. But there are plenty of Jews on the right side of the race/immigration/whatever debates: Mickey Kaus, David Frum, Ira Mehlman, Steven Steinlight, Jonah Goldberg, Marcus Epstein, Mark Steyn (partly), etc.<BR/><BR/>Now unless you have solid evidence to prove it, blaming "the Jews" for deciding their positions on things based on some alleged groupthink <I>is</I> shitting your nest, since we shouldn't want to marginalize a potential ally on any issue.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-33946160458766888292008-06-17T20:56:00.000-07:002008-06-17T20:56:00.000-07:00, Arthur Jensen (half-Jew)? This is misinformation...<I>, Arthur Jensen (half-Jew)? </I><BR/><BR/>This is misinformation, spawned by Sailer (who has never issued a correction) and propagated by the gnxp crowd. Jensen had a single Jewish grandparent, making him about 1/4 Jewish.<BR/><BR/><I>Jews are as overrepresented among race realists as they are among race deniers.</I><BR/><BR/>Too ridiculous to bother responding to.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-12467317574051459812008-06-17T19:28:00.000-07:002008-06-17T19:28:00.000-07:00As race realism gets stronger and stronger, more J...<I>As race realism gets stronger and stronger, more Jews are joining it, but in part that is to make sure it doesn't harm Jewish interests too much.</I><BR/>I don't think it's that calculated. Most likely people join movements they like and, should they achieve prominence, tend to steer things in a direction they like. Most Jews are still terrified of anything that smacks of Nazism, though the younger ones who have no connection to the Freudian-Marxist intellectual tradition (which made some important discoveries and then ossified, sort of like the deal where Aristotle was really a great scientist but sticking to his stuff for 2000 years held science back in Europe) think some of the genetics stuff is neat.<BR/><BR/><I>Jews aren't "joining" the race realist movement - they are pioneers in it. Ever hear of Richard Herrnstein, Michael Levin, Michael Hart, Arthur Jensen (half-Jew)? Jews are as overrepresented among race realists as they are among race deniers.</I><BR/>I wish! There's a long history of race denial among Jews, much of which is based in history (race realist with funny mustache). You can find a few Jews who are race realists but most are really against it.<BR/><BR/><I>And the bit about "Jewish interests" is ridiculous McDonaldian nonsense.</I><BR/>I actually kind of agree with McDonald, although I don't know about the whole bit about driving fertility down. There are people who blame <I>every</I> development since 1960 they don't like on the Jews, which seems a bit excessive and simpleminded: as Inductivist has pointed out, high-church Episcopalians have many of the same ideals). I do wonder how much of the whole mess was due to a misplaced desire to copy European social democracy: no offense to the patriots here, but this 'free market' stuff really sucks. You work 60 hours a week for some business that'll toss you out on your ear if you look at the boss the wrong way, commute 2 hours to your job, and eat fattening crap that gives you diabetes. America ain't the greatest country in the world, at least not anymore.<BR/><BR/>Also, the Christian Right's Israel-worship seems to be something they did on their own initiative. The Jews won't touch them (there was an article about a rabbi who did and was ostracized for it), and yet they still want to support Israel so Jesus can come back.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-55384061957542027632008-06-17T19:09:00.000-07:002008-06-17T19:09:00.000-07:00"This is news to me, although I might be wrong: I ..."This is news to me, although I might be wrong: I don't vacation at The Breakers in Palm Beach, did not attend Choate. <BR/><BR/>It's old news actually. Here's one site among many... ..There are millions of people related to various presidents."<BR/><BR/>So you're saying I'm right. You're admitting purposeful endogamy and marriage among cousins is NOT presently occurring among the upper class. <BR/><BR/>Obviously, there are millions of Americans related to various presidents. Just like there are millions of descendants of Genghis Khan. Who cares? This is not purposeful dynastic arranged marriage. <BR/><BR/> If purposeful dynastic arranged marriage WERE occurring, European-derived Christian above average IQ Americans might be more competitive as a class, more effective in defending our interests.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-35112994486721001252008-06-17T18:41:00.000-07:002008-06-17T18:41:00.000-07:00no man's land said,And the bit about "Jewish inter...no man's land said,<BR/><BR/><I>And the bit about "Jewish interests" is ridiculous McDonaldian nonsense.</I><BR/><BR/>Yes, because we all know Jews have no interests, or are always perfectly disinterested.<BR/><BR/>What an extraordinary claim! I suppose Jews are better than the rest of the human race.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-78085557026589904412008-06-17T18:34:00.000-07:002008-06-17T18:34:00.000-07:00Bush was golden until he started that "two-state s...Bush was golden until he started that "two-state solution" / "roadmap" talk. That's the precise moment when the bloom starting coming off the rose.<BR/><BR/>After that, he was progressively abandoned - first because he was "weak" in prosecuting the war, then because "he made so many mistakes with the war" (the war itself being a mistake is a "radical" conjecture) - and finally allowed to unravel.<BR/><BR/>Now someone else will have to nuke Iran, I guess.<BR/><BR/>Massive White flight to McCain may have been foreseen?<BR/><BR/>Oops, there I go with my conspiracy theories again....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-34028229764460611892008-06-17T18:30:00.000-07:002008-06-17T18:30:00.000-07:00Thanks to no man's land for the list. I would hav...Thanks to no man's land for the list. I would have forgotten Levin. <BR/><BR/>Let me address the witchcraft vs. race thing.<BR/><BR/>"I believe I am discriminated against in hiring decisions. HR people are prejudiced against me because they believe me to be a witch, and they believe witches make bad employees. Thus I demand to only be compared against other witches, and I demand that witches become a certain minimum percentage of every workforce."<BR/><BR/>"But there is no proof for the existence of witches! Major progressive scientists say they don't exist, the King James version of the Bible notwithstanding."<BR/><BR/>"Ah, society believes me to be a witch. I can tell, because of how uncomfortable I feel in certain social situations. My soul is on ice, I tell you. Dry ice!"<BR/><BR/>"So why should you get AA benefits as a witch, and not everyone?"<BR/><BR/>"Because I self-identify as a witch."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-50704681662914291092008-06-17T16:39:00.000-07:002008-06-17T16:39:00.000-07:00"Anonymous said..."Oddly, the closest that the rep..."Anonymous said...<BR/><BR/>"Oddly, the closest that the republicans have come to building a personality cult is around G.W. Bush, a most unlikely candidate for one."<BR/><BR/>Nonsense. He's one of those empty suits that make good hand puppets. If there is any Republican personality cult, it was for Reagan."<BR/><BR/>Nonsense? Nonsense! What about all those "W" bumper stickers, and the even creepier "W - the President" bumper stickers. Not to mention all the fawning articles on Bush in the National Review going back to 1999. Why, on the so-called conservative websites (like Ace of Spades for example) he was made out to be the second coming of George Washington. As I said, it beggars the imagination that anyone would try to make a hero figure out of a man like G.W. Bush (who was, let's not forget, a cheerleader in college), but the Republican party did indeed try.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-53422738755972932542008-06-17T13:17:00.000-07:002008-06-17T13:17:00.000-07:00Anyone who thinks Obama is going to win, much less...Anyone who thinks Obama is going to win, much less in a landslide, is nuts.<BR/><BR/>He couldn't even close the deal over Hillary Clinton in large, working-class states with large numbers of Blacks.<BR/><BR/>It's winner take all, not proportional as in the Dem Primary, so the larger white working class along with conservatives are going to vote for the liberal Democrat (McCain) over the hard-left, Racialist Black Nationalist candidate, Farrakhan Jr er ... Obama.<BR/><BR/>Obama is already defined by Wright, Ayers, Pfleger, etc. as the Farrakhan pawn that he is. You're making the big mistake of confusing marketing demos (where a 4% slice of the population, say tween girls, is worth more than a 25% slice of the population, say female elderly) with voting reality.<BR/><BR/>Even though marketers want tween girls over elderly females, their votes count the same and there's a heck of a lot more of the latter than the former (baby bust reality).<BR/><BR/>Obama is ALREADY writing off Ohio and Florida.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-80226941733534548352008-06-17T13:10:00.000-07:002008-06-17T13:10:00.000-07:00I wonder if guys like Kenan Malik are more likely ...I wonder if guys like Kenan Malik are more likely than average to have black neighbors? The answer to that question is obvious. One thing womens lib got right is their slogan,"the personal is political." Of course people like him would respond,"I am a brilliant well paid intellectual. Of course I seek to live in the nicest parts of town-the fact that they're 99% non-black,well thats societeys fault;its immaterial to me." But when his little daughter Taylor(or the Brit equivalent) comes home from Oxford and wants to take a cheap apartment,and finds a nice flat in Brixton,Kenan would go into full Mel Brooksian mode and sneer,"Are you aware that that area is loaded with ni-",suddenly going silent. "Ni? Whats that,dear father?" Nope you wont see too mnay mebers of the Malik clan doing the hard work of integrating with races that dont exist!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-2157900193559083402008-06-17T11:14:00.000-07:002008-06-17T11:14:00.000-07:00anon. saidTrue, but forensics experts at the time ...anon. said<BR/><BR/><I>True, but forensics experts at the time (and well before) were capable of classifying someone's race nearly as accurately by measuring and calculating rations of various skull and facial bones.<BR/>These techniques have long been used for criminal investigations.</I><BR/><BR/>Yes, the problem though is that Pastor "Mismeasure of Man" S.J. Gould, and his colleagues, would've shrieked their heads off, and maybe called their buddies in government, in protest against such "nutty Nazi evil." (Btw, how does one indicate an eye-roll emoticon in these comments?)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-15240871419454595032008-06-17T10:41:00.000-07:002008-06-17T10:41:00.000-07:00Obama, by the way, is going to win in a landslide....Obama, by the way, is going to win in a landslide. This is going to be 1996 all over again. Don't tell me McCain doesn't remind you of Dole, and Obama of Clinton.<BR/><BR/>And of course demographics have shifted by 2 or 3 points in Obama's direction since 1996 (12 years ago!).<BR/><BR/>The biggest lead Bush ever had over Kerry in the Real Clear Politics "polling average" was 2.5%. Right now Obama is up by 4.0% in the RCP poll average and by 5.7% in the pollster.com average of polls.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-10071650865116840312008-06-17T10:37:00.000-07:002008-06-17T10:37:00.000-07:00Steve, I agree. I think a lot of moderate white vo...Steve, I agree. I think a lot of moderate white voters are going to vote for B.O. as a vote for racial reconciliation. <BR/><BR/>And the English analogy is a good one. The English public hated the civil war, and a new monarch that unites the two houses I am sure would have won in a landslide if they had elections back then.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-60956584473795002972008-06-17T06:37:00.000-07:002008-06-17T06:37:00.000-07:00"Oddly, the closest that the republicans have come..."Oddly, the closest that the republicans have come to building a personality cult is around G.W. Bush, a most unlikely candidate for one."<BR/><BR/> Nonsense. He's one of those empty suits that make good hand puppets. If there is any Republican personality cult, it was for Reagan.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-9793078621379766242008-06-17T06:27:00.000-07:002008-06-17T06:27:00.000-07:00This is news to me, although I might be wrong: I d...This is news to me, although I might be wrong: I don't vacation at The Breakers in Palm Beach, did not attend Choate. <BR/><BR/> It's old news actually. Here's one site among many with the info http://www.who2.com/relatedpresidents.html<BR/> JFK was not related to any and there were some others, but most were related. I think some of it was that well-educated people, even self-educated like Lincoln, were not too common despite very high literacy. So uppercrust families would marry among themselves. New Englanders were especially prolific and their mortality rate was unusually low for the day. I have researched my genealogy backto 17th c. Connecticut, and am amazed at the 8-15 child families, almost all whom lived to grow up and reproduce more 10 child families.<BR/>There are millions of people related to various presidents.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-87869224921396989752008-06-17T00:02:00.000-07:002008-06-17T00:02:00.000-07:00anonymous said:"And the matter of the non-existenc...anonymous said:<BR/><BR/>"And the matter of the non-existence of such [genetic] tests [to classify people by race] before the end of the end of the old South Africa."<BR/><BR/>True, but forensics experts at the time (and well before) were capable of classifying someone's race nearly as accurately by measuring and calculating rations of various skull and facial bones.<BR/>These techniques have long been used for criminal investigations.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-28823836544420889142008-06-16T23:37:00.000-07:002008-06-16T23:37:00.000-07:00@ no man's land I note for the "Jews are behind al...@ no man's land <BR/><BR/><EM>I note for the "Jews are behind all race denial and everything else bad in the world" crowd that Mark Pagel, to judge by his appearance and name, is almost certainly a Jew. Just another crypto-rabbinic race-denier ;)</EM><BR/><BR/>That crowd doesn't exist. But clearly Jews are strongly over-represented at the top of race denial, as they are in the pro-immigration crowd. As race realism gets stronger and stronger, more Jews are joining it, but in part that is to make sure it doesn't harm Jewish interests too much.<BR/><BR/>@ nada<BR/><BR/><EM>However, I'm still confused as to why you choose the term "rabbi" and not a general term like demagogue or even pastor. Is it because all your examples are ethnically Jewish or was that not a coincidence?</EM><BR/><BR/>It's not a coincidence. That combination of traits (high IQ, scholarship, charisma, authoritarianism) is characteristic of rabbis, not pastors, and seems genetically based.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-52890158924557239912008-06-16T23:27:00.000-07:002008-06-16T23:27:00.000-07:00The Obama-as-King-in-waiting image is one the demo...The Obama-as-King-in-waiting image is one the democrats love. I wouldn't be surprised if they have him pull a sword out of a stone on stage at the convention.<BR/><BR/>The democrats - ostensibly the party of the workin' man (even if nowadays that workin' joe is a homosexual bond-trader) - love the idea of royalty. They don't just want to vote for a president - they want to crown him. Look at the personality cult that's been built up around JFK. Or even the one built up around Clinton. Even Kaiser Wilhelm never had such obsequious lick-spittles as the democratic party nominee (whoever he might be) can claim.<BR/><BR/>Conservatives typically don't go in for it as much. They want to know what a politician will do for them, more than vicariously bask in their glory. No republican ever felt slavish awe for Richard Nixon. He was just "our guy" looking out for our (the silent majority's) interests, even if - as it turned out - he wasn't our guy, and he wasn't looking our for our interests. There was an attempt by some of Reagan's inner circle to build a cult of personality around him, although I don't think Reagan himself approved of it or was a party to it.<BR/><BR/>Oddly, the closest that the republicans have come to building a personality cult is around G.W. Bush, a most unlikely candidate for one. Just remember back on all the fawning tripe written about him by the fan-boys at National Review. But then, neither he, nor they, are really conservatives anymore.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-36117703235334502392008-06-16T23:12:00.000-07:002008-06-16T23:12:00.000-07:00"John of London said..."Race, it turns out, is abo..."John of London said...<BR/><BR/>"Race, it turns out, is about who your relatives are—a tautology with manifold implications."<BR/><BR/>This is not always true. I think the strongest practical evidence against the objective existence of "race" is that apartheid South Africa, a constitionally racist state, couldn't come up with a workable scientific definition of race; and if anyone could have, they would have. The South African Racial Classification Act said, in essence, that your race is what you look like."<BR/><BR/>And what someone looks like will get you the right answer (as to what race they are) in the vast majority of cases. I'm sure the fidelity of such a test more than suited the Afrikanners' purposes.<BR/><BR/>"Contrary to what Steve said, this could lead to a child's being classified as of a different race from its parents."<BR/><BR/>Only marignally different from his parents, but vastly different from his great-great-great grandparents. If barack Obama were only 1/16th black, then we wouldn't call him black at all, and neither would he. He would be white.<BR/><BR/>"halfbreed's claim that if race doesn't exist neither can racism is obviously false."<BR/><BR/>Arguments like this clearly have a point - and a good one. You're right that racism would be possible, even if race - as a category - did not exist. People believe they were abducted by aliens, although it never happened. But if race is a completely meaningless category, then how do I (the opressor) know whom to oppress? What attribute guides me in my selecting my victim? Skin color alone? Why? If I held a racial animus towards blacks, it wouldn't necessarily extend to southern Indians, who can be just as dark or darker, or for that matter, very tanned people. Women look very different from me, but I don't dislike them for it. The severely crippled or horribly maimed look very different, but I don't hold it against them. Clearly, it's not just skin color. As indeed there is a whole cluster of features that goes along with a particular race - skin color, facial structure, body type, hair color, etc., to say nothing, one might add, of inward traits.<BR/><BR/>Look this is all stuff that everyone, everywhere knew as recently as 30 years ago - that there is such a thing as race, that's it's real, and that's it's based on your lineage. It took an army of leftist indoctrinated teachers and profs in schools and universities that long to bring us to a point where people such as yourself would believe otherwise. And face up to this - if you were presented with three people - a Hottentot, a Finn, and a Cambodian, and would stare at them agape and befuddled, unable to distinguish between them, then you are just deluded.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-50080845441886376122008-06-16T18:16:00.000-07:002008-06-16T18:16:00.000-07:00"I wonder why they didn't hire some American foren..."I wonder why they didn't hire some American forensic specialists to determine race from DNA samples. Perhaps it was a matter of cost? I gather that the race a person self-selects as is almost always the same as that determined by forensic tests."<BR/><BR/>And the matter of the non-existence of such tests before the end of the end of the old South Africa.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-10212871209347224732008-06-16T18:12:00.000-07:002008-06-16T18:12:00.000-07:00@ will2power:Thanks for the clarification. I agree...@ will2power:<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the clarification. I agree with your assessment of the situation and dismay over the denial of the existence of race. It's a relevant characterization of Obama supporters as well (as discussed heavily on this site). <BR/><BR/>However, I'm still confused as to why you choose the term "rabbi" and not a general term like demagogue or even pastor. Is it because all your examples are ethnically Jewish or was that not a coincidence?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com