Second: You can make a tax deductible contribution via VDARE by clicking here. (Paypal and credit cards accepted, including recurring "subscription" donations.) UPDATE: Don't try this at the moment.
Third: send money via the Paypal-like Google Wallet to my Gmail address (that's isteveslrATgmail.com -- replace the AT with a @). (Non-tax deductible.)
Here's the Google Wallet FAQ. From it: "You will need to have (or sign up for) Google Wallet to send or receive money. If you have ever purchased anything on Google Play, then you most likely already have a Google Wallet. If you do not yet have a Google Wallet, don’t worry, the process is simple: go to wallet.google.com and follow the steps." You probably already have a Google ID and password, which Google Wallet uses, so signing up Wallet is pretty painless.
You can put money into your Google Wallet Balance from your bank account and send it with no service fee.
Or you can send money via credit card (Visa, MasterCard, AmEx, Discover) with the industry-standard 2.9% fee. (You don't need to put money into your Google Wallet Balance to do this.)
Google Wallet works from both a website and a smartphone app (Android and iPhone -- the Google Wallet app is currently available only in the U.S., but the Google Wallet website can be used in 160 countries).
Or, once you sign up with Google Wallet, you can simply send money via credit card, bank transfer, or Wallet Balance as an attachment from Google's free Gmail email service. Here's how to do it.
(Non-tax deductible.)
Fourth: if you have a Wells Fargo bank account, you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Wells Fargo SurePay. Just tell WF SurePay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). (Non-tax deductible.)
Fifth: if you have a Chase bank account (or, theoretically,other bank accounts), you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Chase QuickPay (FAQ). Just tell Chase QuickPay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address (steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). If Chase asks for the name on my account, it's Steven Sailer with an n at the end of Steven. (Non-tax deductible.)
Posts
17 comments:
" Madagascar (which has to be the least strategically located country on Earth)"
The brits beg to differ!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Madagascar
The shower scene in Casino Royale where Bond comforts Vesper Lynd is a stunning piece of cinematography.
Man, It was a lousy year at the movies.
Here's to hoping that this year has more interesting entertainments placed for sale in Cinemas.
On a higher entertainment note, Rome is running again, and it's just as ace as the last season!
"Dreamgirls" pretty much flopped at the box-office. I would never pay to see the story of the Supremes--enough already! As for star Jennie Hudson,I advise her to be careful with her Dreamgirls money:Oscar aside,there is not a big demand for chubby,somewhat homely African Am girls in the movies! "Dreamgirls II:This Time Its Personal"?? I dont think so! :)
Couldn't they make a biopic of Bobby Fischer?
Go see "The Lives of Others" when it comes to your town.
And "The Last King of Scotland" is
good.
The (clothed) shower scene in "Casino Royale" is pretty good in itself, but I think they edited out part of the plot right before it that was required to explain what they are doing in the shower rather than playing poker.
I think Casino Royale is a very very good movie. It seems like you're searching for something that's not even supposed to be there. The movie is ridiculous, but much less ridiculous than the Brosnan versions, and much more entertaining.
You know, I can forgive Mr. Sailer for pushing Bell Curveism and having comment threads filled with nasty, racist cranks because he's a lively and provocative writer, but giving a negative review to Casino Royale? Sir, you go too far!
And jeez, even the numbnuts at Aint It Cool News realized that the opening parkour/ crane sequence was a lot more than empty action. It established through action 007's problem solving methods, in showing how he outsmarted the supernaturally athletic bomb maker.
In his pinko days, Paul Johnson described the books as "sex, snobbery and sadism". I can't remember what he said was bad about them.
"sex,snobbery and sadism"...wasnt that a reference to the Hillary Clinton campaign?
Bond is supposed to be tall, dark, and handsome, but Craig is none of those
I suspect this is the root of Steve's problem with the film. Steve is two of those, but didn't even get a look in.
The filmmakers have dyed his hair light brown...
Sure about this? Craig has denied it:
http://www.exposay.com/daniel-craig-refused-to-dye-hair-for-007/v/6387/
Predicting the next Steve Sailer "controversial" movie question:
"Breach" was made because the American spy giving secrets to a foreign country was Catholic. Can anyone guess why it wasn't made about a Jewish spy giving secrets to Israel?
I know, I'm like Creskin.
That comment about the "nasty racist cranks" -- I have to respond.
Did you ever wonder why people become that way ? Here is why. Read this website:
http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/
showthread.php?t=8752
This is a story told by modern day urban archeologists. They visit an abandoned city. Everyone's gone. It looks like everyone just got up and left an entire city in one day. They left behind everything, such was their haste and such was their fear. It's like one of those science fiction movies where the hero wakes up and the whole city's empty and it's a mystery. This one is mystery too, but not for long. Look at the photos of the little people on the wall. They're missing, it says. But they're not missing. They're dead. Look at the innocent little faces on the wall. Then look at the people on the slab. They're dead too. Then look at the mug shots. Then you know. An entire city, built out of a wilderness and it's dead. Who killed it ? Who backs the people who killed it ? Who do you back ? This is a crime against humanity. This country is a crime. I feel so sick. I feel like Charleton Heston in that movie. God damn them to hell.
Daniel Craig may not have dyed his hair, but the filmmakers could have used lighting to make it look darker. Whatever. I haven't seen the movie, but I've seen Craig, and Sailer is right that he doesn't look like a bond. He looks more like a a Bond adversary.
A better Bond would have been Clive Owen (who bears a slight resemblance to George Lazenby, one of the better Bonds), but I think Owen turned the Cauliflowers down.
Dave
Watching "Children of Men," it was hard to avoid thinking "Why isn't Clive Owen the new James Bond?"
Nor will the media sweep under the rug the fact that Clive Owen was publicly pursued to play Bond long before Craig became the first and only choice.
Variety, a respected entertainment trade publication, reports that the film producers lost out on the chance to have Owen sign on to be Bond when they refused to include gross profit points in any contract offer.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4153/is_20061115/ai_n16847782/pg_1
Post a Comment