tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post871013085227004422..comments2024-03-27T18:24:19.683-07:00Comments on Steve Sailer: iSteve: Richard ShermanUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger118125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-24119516650041696562014-01-25T13:35:15.801-08:002014-01-25T13:35:15.801-08:00Ziggy, I'm a non smoker unlike yourself, appar...<i>Ziggy, I'm a non smoker unlike yourself, apparently. Jews are almost ENTIRELY white. What are they, black? Really? You're saying that Jews are of the Negroid race? I don't think so and not even the most open minded Jew will attest to that. They may be many many things but stupid is not one of them.</i><br /><br />Again, I define white to mean European. Not as yet another word for "Caucasoid." Caucasoid means Caucasoid. I might as well ask you if you're arguing that Nilotics are white if you say that they aren't Bantu.<br /><br /><i>AGAIN. Whites = EUROPE, AND ASIA (Western Asia, the middle east); PARTS OF INDIA; PARTS OF AFRICA (as in NORTH); etc. They are not just found on the continent of Europe.<br />But keep trying, old boy, keep trying...</i><br /><br />Nah. Nobody means Arab, North African, West Asian, South Asian, Indian, etc., when they say "white." They mean European.<br /><br /><i>Doesnt matter. From a scientific perspective that would be most accurate. Anyone who doesnt like it can go lump it.</i><br /><br />Nah. "White" isn't a scientific term.<br /><br /><i>Why do you have such a bugaboo about admitting Jews into the white club?</i><br /><br />Because it's not a club, and people don't get admission for asking nicely?<br /><br /><i>Bottom line: Judaism is by bloodline and and that blood (for the most part from DNA standpoint) is WHITE and that's right.</i><br /><br />It might help if Jews were consistent about this. Better get them in line, first, and get back to me. They change their tune, according to which audience they're playing to; e.g., when they're playing to lefties, Jews claim to be "Diverse," and mention converts, Sammy Davis Jr., etc. Speaking of which, are the Ethiopian Jews really Jews, or not? Because if they are...if in fact <i>any</i> non-whites are real Jews, then "Jews are white" is obviously not a true statement.<br /><br />Can't have it both ways.<br /><br />Obviously Jewry is a tribe, which includes non-religious members, non-Caucasoid members, non-white members, etc. So it's really not accurate at all to categorically state they are white.Svigornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-65617662266217710652014-01-25T12:45:35.180-08:002014-01-25T12:45:35.180-08:00>>Anonymous said...
"""I love... >>Anonymous said...<br />"""I love how some Jews boast they know almost instantly if a stranger is a Jew or a gentile,...but when someone says "that guy looks Jewish," a heated demand is made for an affidavit or for an explanation studded with scholarly cites."<br /><br />Same thing with 'gaydar"""<br /><br /><br />Yeah, that's true. Is there any overlap between gaydar and whether or not one's Jewish? Is there?<br />Of course there would have to be a significant percentage of gay Jews for it to be possible.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-34114205445430278642014-01-25T12:44:13.201-08:002014-01-25T12:44:13.201-08:00>>David said
""No. I said Jews can...>>David said<br />""No. I said Jews can recognize gentiles.""<br /><br />Sure they can. What color's the sky in your world that affords this magical non-scientific powers afforded to Jews? Answer: Non-existent.<br /><br />Similar to "gaydar". perhaps there is some overlapping.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />>>"You can never tell from a name" vs. "That is not a Jewish name."<br /><br /><br /><br />NO, it's quite apt, period. You can't tell SPECIFICALLY whether or not a surname is automatically a "Jewish" surname, especially since vast majority of European surnames originated with Non-Jews who were indigenous to Europe.<br /><br />For the most part, what Judaism has done is merely "Judaize" various surnames (or make them outright their own) <br /><br />Example from Billy Wilder's stalag 17 "What was that man's name? You know, the one who STOLE HIS NAME FROM OUR CAPITAL...something or other Berlin."<br /><br />You can't tell SPECIFICALLY if a surname is automatically Jewish (actually point of fact, if the surname's of European origin then it most likely did NOT originate among Judaism but among non-Jews since Europe was not originally indigenous to Jews per se.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />So then:<br />1. Jews "borrowed" gentile surnames of European orign <br />or<br />2. Jews gave some surnames a few cosmetic touches to make them their own.<br /><br />OK<br /><br />NOW THEN. Notice how he does not or cannot competently address....RICHARD SHERMAN (what the post is about)<br /><br />He attended Stanford and compare his treatment with that of former Stanford teammate Jonathan Martin. <br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-32470232117982249052014-01-25T10:41:39.246-08:002014-01-25T10:41:39.246-08:00>You just contradicted yourself there.<
No....>You just contradicted yourself there.<<br /><br />No. I said Jews can recognize gentiles.<br /><br />>What double standard?<<br /><br />"You can never tell from a name" vs. "That is not a Jewish name."Davidhttp://david-passingparade3.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-90597500848862915822014-01-25T10:17:29.409-08:002014-01-25T10:17:29.409-08:00"I love how some Jews boast they know almost ..."I love how some Jews boast they know almost instantly if a stranger is a Jew or a gentile,...but when someone says "that guy looks Jewish," a heated demand is made for an affidavit or for an explanation studded with scholarly cites."<br /><br />Same thing with 'gaydar'. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-11813506821825417752014-01-24T22:45:01.283-08:002014-01-24T22:45:01.283-08:00>>David said
"But if the name is Smith...>>David said<br /><br />"But if the name is Smith, we hear, "That isn't a Jewish name." ""<br /><br />Smith isn't a Jewish name, unless the person worked in Hollywood back in the early 20th cent.<br /><br />Of course you don't find many US Jews today consciously anglicizing their surnames so that particular example is moot. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-90832823104306665942014-01-24T22:42:04.256-08:002014-01-24T22:42:04.256-08:00>>David said...
""I love how some ...>>David said...<br />""I love how some Jews boast they know almost instantly if a stranger is a Jew or a gentile,...but when someone says "that guy looks Jewish," a heated demand is made for an affidavit or for an explanation studded with scholarly cites.""<br /><br /><br />You just contradicted yourself there. Guess the point is that every ethnic is "certain" that he can "most definitely" tell whether or not that that individual definitely belongs to a particular ethnicity and sometimes it happens to be their own.<br /><br />The overall better point here would've been made stronger if you'd finished it with...."But as we all know....everyone is full of it since countless and tons of examples prove the exception. Thus its silly to try and claim a particular "-dar" regarding who and who isn't part of a particular ethnic (which are mostly of the caucasian persuasion."<br /><br />That would've been the better point, which I just helped. You welcome.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />""Note also the double standard with names.""<br /><br />What double standard? Various ethnics have simply anglicized their names when passing thru Ellis Island in late 19thcent. Notice, John Smith and forebears of Geo. Washington and John Adams didn't anglicize their names when they stepped off the Mayflower (as well as few generations afterwards) they basically were content to keep what they had been named.<br /><br />Self confidence in their identity as well as a natural confidence that they were forging a new ....e.g. terrority, nation, etc etc.<br /><br />And there's a lesson to be learned from that, particularly from all the Sherman come latelys.<br /><br />Speaking of Richard Sherman (which this post is about)...<br /><br />You know how Vegas gives odds on Superbowl?<br /><br />Would like to get a bet/wager going regarding Richard Sherman.<br /><br />1. Did he really graduate from Stanford?<br />2. The major attributed to him, communications. Did he really choose it on his own or was he "persuaded" to chose one that many athletes have clustered around over all DIV1 NCAA Conferences.<br /><br />True, true, not the ordinary Super Bowl wager but creative nonetheless.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-89179651345468418372014-01-24T17:25:29.717-08:002014-01-24T17:25:29.717-08:00I love how some Jews boast they know almost instan...I love how some Jews boast they know almost instantly if a stranger is a Jew or a gentile, how an Italian can detect another Italian, how intelligent people gravitate toward each other even outside of Mensa, how gays have gaydar, but when someone says "that guy looks Jewish," a heated demand is made for an affidavit or for an explanation studded with scholarly cites.<br /><br />Note also the double standard with names. If the name is Rothstein, we hear, "What's in a name? Could be an ethnic German." But if the name is Smith, we hear, "That isn't a Jewish name."Davidhttp://david-passingparade3.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-55907230829559614142014-01-24T13:24:47.155-08:002014-01-24T13:24:47.155-08:00>>Svigor said:
""Not sure what you...>>Svigor said:<br />""Not sure what you're smoking, but I have no idea what you're on about. No, Jews are not remotely "entirely white." White = European, and the vast majority of Jews have substantial non-European ancestry.""<br /><br /><br />Ziggy, I'm a non smoker unlike yourself, apparently. Jews are almost ENTIRELY white. What are they, black? Really? You're saying that Jews are of the Negroid race? I don't think so and not even the most open minded Jew will attest to that. They may be many many things but stupid is not one of them.<br /><br />AGAIN. Whites = EUROPE, AND ASIA (Western Asia, the middle east); PARTS OF INDIA; PARTS OF AFRICA (as in NORTH); etc. They are not just found on the continent of Europe. <br />But keep trying, old boy, keep trying...<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />"Caucasian != white. Nobody means Arabs, Indians, west Asians, south Asians, north Africans, etc., when they say "white."""<br /><br />Doesnt matter. From a scientific perspective that would be most accurate. Anyone who doesnt like it can go lump it.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />""Yes, Jews are almost entirely Caucasian/Caucasoid. No, they are not almost entirely white.""<br /><br />Uh..yes they are. Are they negroid? ANSWER: NO!<br />Are they Mongoloid (East Asia and South East Asia)<br />Answer: NO! Are they Australiasian? Answer: NO!<br /><br />ERGO....they be white folks. Any way you slice, they're racially white.<br /><br />Why do you have such a bugaboo about admitting Jews into the white club? <br /><br />Cause IF....IF....IF.......you state that you can "tell" by "guessin" exactly WHO and who is NOT Jewish...THEN...you also have to be consistent and say that those folks be WHITE as well.<br /><br />Bottom line: Judaism is by bloodline and and that blood (for the most part from DNA standpoint) is WHITE and that's right.<br /><br /><br />AGAIN. NON-EUROPEAN does NOT necessarily mean NOT WHITE. DONT FALL INTO Malcolm X and Louis Farrakhan's "logic" reasoning along the lines of 'if ya'll ain't wearing no blue eyes an' blondie hair then you automatically be a brotha'<br /><br />NO <br />NO<br />and...<br />NO<br /><br />I think you're engaging in the leg pulling. Do stop.<br /><br />And have a good day.<br /><br />Notice you dont want to take up what the post originally was about, namely, Richard Sherman.<br /><br />FOR INSTANCE: How come 2 Stanford grads in the NFL: Sherman and Jonathan Martin are treated very differently by their peers as well as by the black and white communities???<br /><br />Any answer? Anyone?????<br /><br />Both Stanford grads. Both NFLers. Yet both are receiving different treatment.<br /><br />Why?<br />Why is that?<br /><br />Anyone?<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-84358892794472344672014-01-24T12:27:58.100-08:002014-01-24T12:27:58.100-08:00AGAIN, Judaism in US is almost ENTIRELY white. Wow...<i>AGAIN, Judaism in US is almost ENTIRELY white. Wow, amazing how so many Jews feel soooo insulted to be called white. Have to remember that one down the road. "worst insult to call a Jew is 'you honkie cracker white dude!' Of all the things to call them, THAT one is the worst and takes the cake.<br /><br />The rest, 2nd part, is a lie. Caucasians are also indigenous to Asia, hence the term CaucASIAN. DUH.<br /><br />Not even almost entirely. NORTH Africa does in fact contain some native caucasians. </i><br /><br />Not sure what you're smoking, but I have no idea what you're on about. No, Jews are not remotely "entirely white." White = European, and the vast majority of Jews have substantial non-European ancestry.<br /><br />Caucasian != white. Nobody means Arabs, Indians, west Asians, south Asians, north Africans, etc., when they say "white."<br /><br />Yes, Jews are almost entirely Caucasian/Caucasoid. No, they are not almost entirely white.<br /><br /><i>Yes, we ARE talking blood. Mormonism is derived via blood (the orignal members of the noble 12 and the original 70 are all blood lines) AND water Baptism. Baptism in this regard, is similar to ancient Judaic Circumcision which was a visible outward sign that one was in fact a Jew and part of the racial bloodline.</i><br /><br />Oh, nonsense. There are tons of secular Jews, agnostic Jews, atheistic Jews, non-observant Jews, etc. The Jewish community accepts them as Jews (e.g., never heard a Jew say Einstein wasn't a Jew) because Judaism is not what makes Jews - tribal membership is. Mormonism is what makes Mormons.<br /><br /><i>And no, no, no...there simply is not.</i><br /><br />Yes, there is. My Jewdar is pretty durn good, actually.<br /><br /><i>And that's all they are...guesses.</i><br /><br />Really accurate ones. Hence, the reality of Jewish looks.<br /><br />Fella, Jews are just more inbred. That, plus their non-European ancestry, makes them relatively easy to spot.Svigornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-63517235048319424052014-01-24T12:13:45.806-08:002014-01-24T12:13:45.806-08:00If IQ mayter so much how come asian american kids ...If IQ mayter so much how come asian american kids on average have to score about 80 points higher on the sat than white kids to get into top ivies? The difference is about 40 points for uc schools.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-68406639132306513362014-01-24T08:57:49.748-08:002014-01-24T08:57:49.748-08:00>>Anonymous said...
""You don'... >>Anonymous said...<br />""You don't have to look at Harvard's hockey team anymore. ""<br /><br /><br />Er, yes. Speaking of Harvard athletes, anyone still remember Harvard grad Jeremy Lin?<br /><br />Lin graduated from Harvard with a respectable 3.5 in economics. The major is not as clustered for athletes as is Communications (Sherman's major); Sociology; Criminal Justice.<br /><br />If Lin indeed were a special admit (highly unlikely) this is proving once and for all that what Ivies and Stanford consider to be special admits are quite, quite well suited for all the rest of the schools out there.<br /><br />Remember: no on is claiming that Sherman couldn't ace or cut it in most colleges. <br /><br />I'm saying he got into Stanford cause he was a special admit.<br /><br />Jeremy Lin, however, probably could have gotten into Harvard legitimately on his own without major difficulty, perhaps.<br /><br /><br />And the other thing: 2 Stanford Grads and former teammates: Sherman and Jonathan Martin. Each one now in the NFL and each treated very differently by their peers.<br /><br />Which one does both communities (black and white) respect the most? Which player is pitied an which player is respected?<br /><br />Pretty much sums up how the black community views those legitimately smart bros whom it considers to be acting white.<br /><br />Which player is respected, Martin or Sherman?<br /><br />Which one?<br /><br />The answer....is staring us...in the face.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-88625925520411053922014-01-24T06:06:30.308-08:002014-01-24T06:06:30.308-08:00You don't have to look at Harvard's hockey...You don't have to look at Harvard's hockey team anymore. Since Tommy Amaker took over as basketball coach, they've been surprisingly competitive. I'm sure all of his athletes are potential Rhodes Scolars. Fight Fiercely, boyz.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-30412845093060209242014-01-23T17:37:59.214-08:002014-01-23T17:37:59.214-08:00>>Hunsdon said...
Yes, I know what you sa...>>Hunsdon said...<br /><br /><br /><br />Yes, I know what you said.<br /><br />Caucaus mountain region is Western Asia; That region of all those Islamic "stan" nations. You know, Afghanistan; etc cities like Kabul; etc.<br /><br />So is the middle east, by the way. Western Asia, but still Asia.<br /><br /><br />There's your sugar. Still waiting for YOUR proof that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Richard Sherman has the IQ for Stanford. I know that he's such a "good friend" what with you constantly singing his praises and all, but well...go work in his PR because frankly this verbal fellatio of yours regarding his big IQ is getting a bit annoying to listen to.<br /><br />You have a good day.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-33127606078855035272014-01-23T17:03:01.914-08:002014-01-23T17:03:01.914-08:00Anonydroid: Caucasians are also indigenous to Asia...Anonydroid: Caucasians are also indigenous to Asia, hence the term CaucASIAN. DUH.<br /><br />Hunsdon: Please, if you have anything to support this, could you provide me with a link? Pretty please, with sugar on top? I would love to see a supporting cite. I'm begging you.Hunsdonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-54390440233809681632014-01-23T15:31:29.692-08:002014-01-23T15:31:29.692-08:00>>Anonymous said...
""Exactly I pe...>>Anonymous said...<br />""Exactly I personally love what Sherman did and painting him as a thug just don't fly."<br /><br /><br />Don't miss what's happening. Sherman himself wants to be thought of in that way. HE wants it. He knows damn well that that's how you get the endorsements etc. He wants the image, the cred within the community etc.<br /><br /><br />Here's an interesting thing: NOTICE THE DIFFERENCE between how Richard Sherman is being portrayed (on the whole exactly the way he wants and he likes it) AND CONTRAST IT WITH...Miami's Jonathan Martin WHO ALSO ATTENDED STANFORD, he was Sherman's teammate!<br /><br /><br />QUESTION: WHICH PLAYER...is receiving the cred, the most respect within the black community at large?<br /><br />We saw how it panned out regarding Martin. He was considered soft, sissy, effeminate, etc. NO ONE would think that Jonathan Martin didnt get into Stanford legitimately. His family tree more than gives him cred in that sense.<br /><br />But Sherman? He is the idealized black NFLer in both worlds. For the whites, cause he attended Stanford (and some here even want to assume that he's smart smart smart enough for Stanford)<br /><br />For the blacks, he has the cred because he plays a badass position, Cornerback. He's physical, trash talking, and backs it up on the field.<br /><br />In other words, while his speech (relatively free of ebonics) will please the whites, his on field as well as "feud" with Crabtree (who is a known thug) gives him the legitimate cred that never has nor ever will be given to Jonathan Martin.<br /><br />Perhaps Steve could do a post on this contrast. <br /><br />2 Stanford grads (or at least one legitimate one) both in the NFL. <br /><br />One was taunted and pittied.<br /><br />The other does the taunting both verbally and physically and dares others to do something about it. AND he backs it up on the field.<br /><br />Which one do NFL fans respect? In BOTH communities, WHICH ONE do both respect???<br /><br />Sherman.<br /><br />Very telling.<br /><br />He knows what he's doing and is playing it for all its worth. "Not gonna put me in that category like you did with J. Martin!" He's saying. "I back it up al the time!" And yet he gets cred with whites cause he went to Stanford as opposed to an SEC school.<br /><br />Interesting.<br /><br />Nobody wants to be seen "acting" white in that community and Sherman just made sure that no one will accuse him of doing that, but since Stanford attended and reasonably spoken, he gets the white cred and ultimately their dollars.<br /><br />BrilliantAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-88800628274281200382014-01-23T15:20:26.672-08:002014-01-23T15:20:26.672-08:00>>Hunsdon said...
""You seem to be...>>Hunsdon said...<br />""You seem to be thinking that Svigor is a) Jewish, and b) offended that someone would mistake him for a cracker.""<br /><br /><br />Unlike yourself and some others here, I don't assume anything. ASSUMING makes an ass out of you (perhaps not that difficult) and me (of which I prefer to avoid doing. Usually this is avoided by clear thinking and common sense) But do continue.<br /><br />I was simply stating that perhaps Jews in general would be insulted at being called white. If it was implied that I was stating that the particular person was Jewish then that was my responsibility of which I correct here. It wasn't directly intended toward him per se.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />>>Either you're trying to be funny, or you're making fundamental errors.<br /><br /><br />I wasn't trying to be funny. Simply stating facts. From a scientific standpoint, there is no such thing as a "Jewish" color or....biological race in the strictest term of the word as it is used.<br />Negroid; Caucasoid; Australiasoid; Mongoloid; but nope....no Judaicaoid or Jew-oid race. Sorry, but it simply isn't recognized by modern science any more than there is in existence a Gaelic-oid race or a Germanic-oid race or an Ibernian-oid race. These terms are non-existent and for good reason: They don't exist.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />""Hunsdon: Words fail me."<br /><br /><br />Well, if common sense and facts fail you then must admit I'm not entirely surprised. Apparently there are people here (including you but not limited to you per se) who appear under this delusion that this Richard Sherman (the subject of this particular post) is some kind of exemplary former student of Stanford as well as being a near perfect representative.<br /><br />Lets....state it here an now.<br /><br /><br />For the most part, unless people are avid Seattle; NFC's Western Division; Stanford Cardinals; or any other team of which Sherman played, chances are very good that most haven't a clue as to who he was BEFORE the postseason in particular AFTER his national interview on Sunday.<br /><br />People just aren't interested in Cornerbacks in general even the best ones currently playing in the NFL.<br /><br />FOR INSTANCE: Denver's Champ Bailey. He is a 12time Pro Bowler and has an excellent chance of making the HOF after his career. He is an excellent CB, BUT you dont generally hear tons and tons and tons of media coverage of Champ Bailey from a national standpoint. Granted, he will now receive some coverage since his teams in the superbowl and he'll do the obligatory media day. <br /><br />But still. For the most part.......CBs in particular and Defensive players in general do not receive the amount of media coverage during the super bowl as compared to QBs WRs or even RBs. <br /><br />I'll give the player this much: The fact that Richard Sherman deliberately inserted himself into the national conversation re:Super Bowl, NFL, etc etc means he is definitely meda savvy. He saw his opportunity and took it. Some have remarked on the similarities between him and media savvy HOFer Deion Sanders, who was/is quite adept at garnering media attention to himself.<br /><br />The fact that Sherman is receiving more than QB Russell Wilson at the moment is something. Obviously this won't last but it is quite interesting and so one must conclude that Richard Sherman knows how to garner attention, not to the team but to himself. <br /><br />Whether this leads to major endorsements is entirely up to him, agent, PR etc. Should he have a great game then most likely he will succeed in this area.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-81500678851226575662014-01-23T15:04:47.499-08:002014-01-23T15:04:47.499-08:00Exactly I personally love what Sherman did and pai...Exactly I personally love what Sherman did and painting him as a thug just don't fly. <br /><br />Have folks checked out Colin Kapernick's Instagram? That's a thug or thug wannabe at least.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-79645256282320948542014-01-23T14:25:03.919-08:002014-01-23T14:25:03.919-08:00Anonydroid at 1:18 PM said: AGAIN, Judaism in US ...Anonydroid at 1:18 PM said: AGAIN, Judaism in US is almost ENTIRELY white. Wow, amazing how so many Jews feel soooo insulted to be called white. Have to remember that one down the road. "worst insult to call a Jew is 'you honkie cracker white dude!' Of all the things to call them, THAT one is the worst and takes the cake.<br /><br />Hunsdon asked: Are you quite new here? Are you phrasing your arguments in the way you wish to? You seem to be thinking that Svigor is a) Jewish, and b) offended that someone would mistake him for a cracker.<br /><br />Either you're trying to be funny, or you're making fundamental errors.<br /><br />Anonydroid continued: Caucasians are also indigenous to Asia, hence the term CaucASIAN. DUH.<br /><br />Hunsdon: Words fail me.Hunsdonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-81507352782179206182014-01-23T14:07:01.390-08:002014-01-23T14:07:01.390-08:00AGAIN, Judaism in US is almost ENTIRELY white. Wow...<i>AGAIN, Judaism in US is almost ENTIRELY white. Wow, amazing how so many Jews feel soooo insulted to be called white. Have to remember that one down the road. "worst insult to call a Jew is 'you honkie cracker white dude!' Of all the things to call them, THAT one is the worst and takes the cake.<br /><br />The rest, 2nd part, is a lie. Caucasians are also indigenous to Asia, hence the term CaucASIAN. DUH.<br /><br />Not even almost entirely. NORTH Africa does in fact contain some native caucasians. </i><br /><br />Not sure what you're smoking, but I have no idea what you're on about. No, Jews are not remotely "entirely white." White = European, and the vast majority of Jews have substantial non-European ancestry.<br /><br />Caucasian != white. Nobody means Arabs, Indians, west Asians, south Asians, north Africans, etc., when they say "white."<br /><br />Yes, Jews are almost entirely Caucasian/Caucasoid. No, they are not almost entirely white.<br /><br /><i>Yes, we ARE talking blood. Mormonism is derived via blood (the orignal members of the noble 12 and the original 70 are all blood lines) AND water Baptism. Baptism in this regard, is similar to ancient Judaic Circumcision which was a visible outward sign that one was in fact a Jew and part of the racial bloodline.</i><br /><br />Oh, nonsense. There are tons of secular Jews, agnostic Jews, atheistic Jews, non-observant Jews, etc. The Jewish community accepts them as Jews (e.g., never heard a Jew say Einstein wasn't a Jew) because Judaism is not what makes Jews - tribal membership is. Mormonism is what makes Mormons.<br /><br /><i>And no, no, no...there simply is not.</i><br /><br />Yes, there is. My Jewdar is pretty durn good, actually.<br /><br /><i>And that's all they are...guesses.</i><br /><br />Really accurate ones. Hence, the reality of Jewish looks.<br /><br />Fella, Jews are just more inbred. That, plus their non-European ancestry, makes them relatively easy to spot.Svigornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-88493320631148283402014-01-23T13:18:30.609-08:002014-01-23T13:18:30.609-08:00>>"Svigor said...
""US Jewry ... >>"Svigor said...<br />""US Jewry is mostly non-white. "White" being of entirely, or almost-entirely, European ancestry.""<br /><br /><br />AGAIN, Judaism in US is almost ENTIRELY white. Wow, amazing how so many Jews feel soooo insulted to be called white. Have to remember that one down the road. "worst insult to call a Jew is 'you honkie cracker white dude!' Of all the things to call them, THAT one is the worst and takes the cake.<br /><br />The rest, 2nd part, is a lie. Caucasians are also indigenous to Asia, hence the term CaucASIAN. DUH.<br /><br />Not even almost entirely. NORTH Africa does in fact contain some native caucasians. <br /><br /><br /><br />>>And the Judaism to Mormonism comparison is a non-sequitur; we're discussing blood, not religion.<br /><br /><br />Yes, we ARE talking blood. Mormonism is derived via blood (the orignal members of the noble 12 and the original 70 are all blood lines) AND water Baptism. Baptism in this regard, is similar to ancient Judaic Circumcision which was a visible outward sign that one was in fact a Jew and part of the racial bloodline.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />>>And yes, there is such a thing as "Jewish looks."<br /><br />And no, no, no...there simply is not. You and others may suppose and assume that some appear or "look" or resemble to be Jewish but point of fact is that modern science has relegated that pseudo-ness to the ash heap, along with alchemy and sexual astrological signs or whatever the ancient fads were in the pagans temple rites.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />>>That's why I can take such accurate guesses.<br /><br />And that's all they are...guesses. <br />"The wrong view of science constantly betrays itself in the desire to be right"---Economist and Philosher Karl Popper. <br /><br />Popper's assessment of this childish nonsense was apt and it fits perfectly here.<br /><br />FACT: We can no more "guess" our way into who and who isn't a Jew than we can "guess" who is a native Irishman. And Ireland has as many Irish/Gaelic members as the US does of Jews.<br /><br /><br /><br />>>Much more accurate guesses than for other Caucasoid nationalities, btw.<br /><br /><br /><br />Right, yes, of course. Sure. <br />Ok, now you are simply pulling my leg. Make him stop! Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-51897674068790134322014-01-23T10:54:11.334-08:002014-01-23T10:54:11.334-08:00FACT: Especially since US Jewry is roughly 99% whi...<i>FACT: Especially since US Jewry is roughly 99% white. US Judaism is more caucasian persuasion based than even Mormonism. (The LDS now contains a significant percentage of Pacific Islanders, which is certainly more than we can say for Jews)</i><br /><br />US Jewry is mostly non-white. "White" being of entirely, or almost-entirely, European ancestry.<br /><br />And the Judaism to Mormonism comparison is a non-sequitur; we're discussing blood, not religion.<br /><br />And yes, there is such a thing as "Jewish looks." That's why I can take such accurate guesses. Much more accurate guesses than for other Caucasoid nationalities, btw.Svigornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-30697607399683268082014-01-23T10:09:02.891-08:002014-01-23T10:09:02.891-08:00""That wasn't the case with Sherman,...<br />""That wasn't the case with Sherman, who was clearly smart enough to graduate from Stanford."<br /><br />See, we technically dont really know that. DID he? His wonderlich test suggests 106IQ and that is NOT sufficient for Stanford. For the SEC, no question. Stanford and Ivies, no way. That means he's a special admit.<br /><br />Remember, as a special admit he would be given special treatment that is unavailable to the rest of the student body. Some here remarked that his major was Communications and that is definitely a clustering major among athletes.<br /><br />This jibes in with USA Today's investigative report few yrs back regarding athletes clustering around a few select majors in order to maintain their eligibility. Some of the more popular majors in all NCAA DIV 1 conferences for BB and FB athletes which strong demonstrate clustering, were:<br /><br />1 Communications<br />2 Sociologiy<br />3 Criminal Justice<br />4 Clapping to the music Er Music <br /><br />ALSO, in the case of Stanford, there was revealed a couple years ago the existence of a "private" course book that was ONLY reserved for football and basketball players. These classes were totally closed to all but the FB and BB players. They were designed specifically for them in order to allow them to keep their eligibility.<br /><br />Since we now know that Sherman's major was a very popular one that has found athletes clustering around throughout DIV 1 NCAA, perhaps its best not too go completely ga ga with boisterous hand clapping that this special admit "graduated".l<br /><br />I begin to wonder if you are not his good friend, or perhaps assisted him in graduating or at least are a member of his PR team or his agent that you evince such an interest that this person is the 2nd coming of Mark Zuckerberg.<br /><br />Lets see...<br /><br />A special admit, who clustered around a semi-bogus major at a school while extremely prestigious, has been known to have a secret court book that is completely unavailable to the entire student body and is ONLY available to FB and BB students, strongly demonstrating that he more than benefitted from additional help (e.g. perhaps ringers taking tests for him? Perhaps answers fed to him in advance?) that is not available to the rest of the student body?<br /><br />Yes, Rachel Jeantel and the rest of the left side of the bell curve is very, very much relevant and apt in this particular situation.<br /><br />The overall point: Stanford is not beneath making an occasional Faustian Bargain: Winning or potentially winning NCAA championships in order to increase revenue to their athletic dept as well as increase funds from the alumni giving funds. If a few technicalities and additional special admits have to be granted access to Stanford, then so be it. While it may seem regrettable for mighty Stanford to allow such subterfuge among its "STUDENT"" Athletes, the end (profits, revenue, increased endowments in the future etc) more than justify the means.<br /><br />I do not find fault with Stanford for this. Such is the way of the world and most every NCAA school participates in the deception. In this case, subterfuge is understandable.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />""I bet he is also smart enough to comment more concisely than you.""<br /><br /><br />And that is a non-sequitor, but I'm sure that you, if you are indeed part of his PR firm and/or his agent, will see to that, I'm sure.<br /><br />You have a nice day.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-50300753213234082182014-01-23T10:07:03.976-08:002014-01-23T10:07:03.976-08:00>>Dave Pinsen said...
""Yes, Rache...>>Dave Pinsen said...<br />""Yes, Rachel Jeantel is a non-sequitur, because we aren't discussing the admittance of someone of her (presumed) low IQ to Stanford.""<br /><br />No, she is NOT a non-sequitur, we are discussing someone of ANY low IQ that does not measure up to Stanford's qualifications.<br /><br />Sorry that you seem to have a problem with Rachael Jeantel as a symbol of the left side of the bell curve, but factually that would also include Richard Sherman since he does not measure up to Stanford's qualifications. He's a special admit and therefore Stanford lowered its bar so to speak to allow him admittance.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />""If Stanford admitted an 80 IQ football player, that would be wrong, because the player wouldn't be able to graduate.""<br /><br />IF Stanford allowed an any athlete with an IQ even of three digits say about 105, that athlete would STILL not be able to graduate from Stanford. According to Steve's article (and admittedly you have to dig further to find the particular charts) the charts show the wide and vast discrepancy between football and basketball students and non students. It shows the SAT and IQ average of each.<br /><br />The IQ the average Stanford non-athlete student, was 110. The average IQ of Stanford's football and basketball athletes were around 99. THAT is totally unacceptable for Stanford.<br /><br />Admittedly, this average is much higher than other NCAA DIV 1 schools (e.g. SEC comes to mind) but it is still at least for Stanford's standards of excellence totally unacceptable.<br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-80418626346083938152014-01-23T07:11:53.665-08:002014-01-23T07:11:53.665-08:00IF someone wants to say "Yeah, but that non-a...<em>IF someone wants to say "Yeah, but that non-athletic student needs to have something more on the ball equivalent to being an amazing US HS top recruit pick." </em><br /><br />I don't know the answer to this: if an applicant has Sherman's SAT scores and is not an athlete, but appears to be a genius at playing the flute or dance or something, does Stanford have a "special admit" for that student?<br /><br />If the claim is that they admit some lower-IQ students who happen to have great talents in other areas which should be encouraged, and athletes fall into that category, then fine, but there should be other students in that category too. There are other things besides sports that you can be talented at without being book smart. If those kids aren't getting in and getting the special consideration that the athletes are getting, then it's obviously just about the sports -- and the sports money.Cail Corishevhttp://cailcorishev.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.com