My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer
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
19 comments:
Is it just me or does McCain bear a striking resemblance to Ziggy these days?
Who's Ziggy? (Sorry I'm a clueless German).
He looks like Charlie Chaplin to me!
JD
P.S. No, I don't mean he's a clown (clowns are friendlier), it's just his face.
This is ziggy.
The resemblance seems kind of weak to me, McCain doesn't look nearly that likeable.
Thanks, google!
http://images.google.de/images?hl=de&q=ziggy
During the speech, I was trying to figure out who McCain sounds like. I decided on a cross between Bruce Dern and Gary Bauer.
The McCains have made a pact with the devil: Cindy can preserve her youth ... AT THE COST OF HER HUSBAND AND HER ETERNAL SOUL!
Seriously, McCain is wearing some heavy duty make-up and just looks like the only thing on his mind is the nearest La-Z-Boy. Old old, not Reagan old like I say.
And WTF is it with Cindy? Holy crap she's in her 60's and I don't want to think what might happen if I were in a room with her after six beers. Oh dear god what have I done what have I done, four beers!
S*** just ain't right.
--Senor Doug
it does look like he's had it sanded down or something. At the public library where I used to work there were 2 people with similar (though larger) bulges. No one knew what it was, but they were both on schizophrenic (though not homeless) people.
Hello.
First of all, I would like to apologise for my eventual poor English and present, as an excuse for that, the fact that English is not my native language.
While I was doing a research on the iternet concerning the State of Mexico, it's peoples and cultures, I found your three part writings concerning "Series on the Mexican racial hierarchy and its implications for America".
I read them all but I wanted to respond more specifically for the third paper.
I am a true Hispanic. I do not live in America nor am I from America. I am from Europe and I am not a Spaniard. Thus, and because I am avidly interested in History - though I do not hava a degree, yet - I think I have some high ground to talk about it.
For what I read, I think you do not understand what happened in Latin America since the Portuguese and the Spanish got there. While I agree with you that an influx of non Europeans to the United States - or any other European or European derived Nation or State such as Brazil or Argentina - is hghly prejudicial I cannot stand your riduculous theories on "racial inequality" in Latin America. I am not stating that such do not exist, I am simply stating that your theory over that is wrong and even offensive.
We have to repport ourselves to Hispania, the Latin Name of the Iberian Peninsula where the true Latin/Hispanic States of Portugal and Spain stand. In the XV century, Portugal and closely after, the rest of Hispania started the movement of European Colonialism after getting rid of the eight century long moorish presence in Hispania.
The settlements of this Hispanic peoples in the Americas did not had the objective to install an European population there, only to install a Portuguese or Spanish militar and economic presence.
Speaking of whites and non whites, intermarrige between whites and non whites was not aloud. Only after, when more Northern European Nations entered the Colonial Game like France, the Netherlands and England, and became a clear threat to "Hispanic" interests, did the Hispanic kings aloud and even incentivated the marriege between white males and non white females with the purpose of creating a more "willing to fight for the European Nations" native populations.
However, and this is the offensive part on your essays, white women were never aloud to marry non whites. Due to the charactheristics of those settlements, white women were a tiny proportion of the population, being much underrepresented. If you believe that white women somehow managed to have sexual relations with nonwhites, you must have to understand that both Portuguese and Spanish society were the most Conservative societies of Europe; Since the 1490s, both Portugal and Spain had the so called "Leis de Limpeza de Sangue" or Cleanless of blood laws which premitted the pesecution of people only due to their non-European blood - even and mainly Jews and Muslims; this laws also prevented such marrieges to happened and more than that, it prevented European Hispanic women to engage in relations with those peoples; the Inquisition and the Kingdom's higher institutions were responsible for that.
I don't doubt the mestizo or indian or black preferences concerning European women, considering European women above their own comunity's women. I do not doubt it because I as well do think that European women are indeed the most beautifull on the world, and also due to some other aspects particular to European women that I will not state in depth here.
The thing is, in those times, and mainly in Latin America, white women were not aloud to engage in any kind of sexual relations with non whites while to white men were granted all the freedoms in their sexual lives, even raping indian and black women at will.
Also, your assertion that mestizos go after blondes is nonesense.
For instance, blonde women, and by blonde I consider women of yellowish or yellowish shades hair, is too rare in Hispania itself. They probabily constitute some 10% of the total, being at best little more than 20% in some areas of Northwest Hispania like Galiza, Asturias or Northern Portugal.
Blonde women would be incredibly rare in a predominantly mestizo latin America. Take this into account. For Mexico, we have (imagine) a 60% non white and 40% white society. 30% of society is comprised by white males. From the 10% white females available, who will throw the 20% restant white males into mixed race relationships, only 10% would be blonde. That means 1% of the total population would be blonde females.
I can assure you that those 1% blonde females would all be directed towards those 10% white males. There is no way that mestizos would have access to blonde women. The only white women non whites could have had access were "fallen women" and, probabily, they were very few. And from those very few, more than 90% would be burnettes.
I believe I have discredit that mestizo-blonde-white-women thing. That non white + blonde (or burnette) white women is a recent American mantra, based on unnatural ideologies like multiculturalism.
You have thus to understand that the entire cast system of Latin America was designed to protect white women the most. White women were few and as so, those white women would only marry (and engage in sexual relations) with white males. But unlike North America, you couldn't simply be white to have access to white girls. You would have to be the best of the white males, because:
1) due to the surplus of white males, there were more white males than females and as so, some white males would not have a white female to mate.
2) white women were regarded as socially acceptable, as a symbol of status and were pratically the only women who could ostentate titles such as "Lady", "Coundess" or others
3) white women are indeed the more beautifull, desired and with the best education.
4) white females came from the same cultural sphere than white males.
Those reasons assured that
1) only the "best" white males could manage to have acess to white women
2) all white women would have access to white males.
That is the reason why there are still white people in every major latin American country (though, as you can see in South Africa, when whites stop being the elite, their women are viciously raped and used as trophies, and that alone, without the advent of multiculturalism, can lead to the extintion of white women as in Haiti or Honduras and some regions of Brazil that were never massively settled by European females).
That is also why there are big mixed race comunities. And that is why those mixed race comunities are white by the paternal side and non white by the maternal side.
Your conclusions are indeed correct. Your assertions are also correct. But your way of exlaining them, how you explain the "why is that?" is simply ridiculous.
I hope you have understand this and I will wait for some reply.
Regards,
from a true Hispanic.
I hope you are mature enough to aloud the publication of mine comment. I thought that censors were communist and that freedom of expression and fair debate were an American characteristic.
But maybe all the anti-Americans that are surrounding me here in Europe are right, and I am wrong.
What is it?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziggy_(comic)
Holy holy crap. She's NOT in her 60's; she's ten years older than me!
My God. A six pack and she's ... doable.
Save me from myself Steve!
--Senor Doug
It's not just his face that's weird. I find the whole Rolling Thunder vibe McCain gives off a bit creepy. I'm surprised he had enough political common sense to add Palin, an actual human being, to his ticket and not an android like Romney.
I think she is actually 55. The video said McCain was 41 when they met, but lied and said he was 37. She was 24, but lied and said she was 27. this makes them 17 years apart.
Off topic, but why not?
James Flynn has a piece in New Scientist this week on black IQ, illegitimacy, and sex differences in marriage preference between, whites, blacks, and hispanics.
He attributes part of the difference in illigitimacy to the fact so many male blacks kill each other, commit crimes, and won't commit to working. Not particularly shocking, except he is a liberal.
More surprisingly, he also attributes part of the bastardy gap to black males dating and marrying non-black women.
Haha, gotcha. It is the fault of white men not wanting to marry black women. This despite the (silly) recent studies 'showing' that white men find black women as attractive as white women. Those studies imply that the differential is the result of black women having a much larger aversion to race-mixing than black men. A conclusion Flynn does not make.
The numbers Flynn provides don't show that the entire babymamma gap can be attributed to the out-marriage and good husband gap, though.
Sadly, the article is subscriber-only.
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/opinion/mg19926726.400-perspectives-still-a-question-of-black-vs-white.html
Holy holy crap. She's NOT in her 60's; she's ten years older than me!
My God. A six pack and she's ... doable.
Save me from myself Steve!
--Senor Doug
Ok, I'm a little buzzed so this is hilarious right now. To cure yourself of your amorous attachment go look at some videos from 6 mos ago. Cindy does appear to be getting younger as McCain gets closer to being president. You'll have to come up with your own theory of the whys of her age regression.
And since true hispanic has been here tonight, puts me in mind of a story I read in a Spanish textbook. A young man fell in love with a painting of a woman long dead. In the end, he entered the painting and they lived happily ever after due to magical realism or some such nonsense.
"The resemblance seems kind of weak to me, McCain doesn't look nearly that likeable."
But I think his handlers are trying to make him look more likeable which unfortunately makes him come across as kind of meek and confused.
"He looks like Charlie Chaplin to me!"
Charlie Chaplin????? I don't think so. I mean if I were a 14 yo girl I could really dig Charlie Chaplin. McCain, not so much.
re: community organizing
John Judis has an original piece on Obama's early days as a community organizer in Chicago, and the lessons he learned.
Not your usual.
"My God. A six pack and she's ... doable."
Man, her daughter, she is doable!
Well since we are talking chicks on this thread, Bruce Dern plays Bill Paxton's Dad on Big Love, which reminds me that I sincerely hope they bring Branka Katic onboard as Wife #4 this season.
Also, Dern played opposite Jon Voight in "Coming Home", and Voight was at the convention all week, and in real life he plays Brangolina's Dad, and Brangolina wants to film Atlas Shrugged, which should send the proverbial Chris-Matthews-ian tingle up the legs of all y'all Ayn Randian nihilists at iSteve.
Oh, and the reason that McAmnesty looks like Ziggy is because the gooks crucified him in Hanoi and now he can't lift his arms above his shoulders.
In general, dudes who underwent 5 years of sadistic torture tend to look a little different from more normalish dudes.
As for Cindy, I was worried that she would be deathly jealous of Sarah, but Sarah's such a jewel of a human being that I think she's winning over Cindy.
Plus Cindy seems to have a soft spot for Sarah's kids, or, if she doesn't, then at least she's darned good at faking it.
PS: Bruce Dern starred in Hitchcock's final flick.
PPS: Was just reading up on Dern's bio, and it looks like his family was big FDR people - Eleanor was his Godmother.
Weird that the roles seem to be reversed in Coming Home [vis-a-vis Voight's affiliations status post 9-11].
Post a Comment