May 25, 2009

Sorry

I likely won't be posting new material or moderating comments on Monday evening or Tuesday. Please check back later in the week.

My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

16 comments:

  1. That's okay Steve--enjoy the time off!

    ReplyDelete
  2. When he gets back, he's gonna have some splainin' to do....

    ReplyDelete
  3. Enjoy your well-earned break.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hmmm, so who is approving these comments for posting?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I hope whatever you're doing is remunerative, enjoyable, or both.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "Hmmm, so who is approving these comments for posting?"

    Uh oh, the prison guard just turned off the cameras!

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Hmmm, so who is approving these comments for posting?"

    I had been wondering about that myself.

    Lucius Vorenus, now's your chance to say what you REALLY think!

    ReplyDelete
  8. I am Lugash.

    Well, Steve was right(yet again) about Obama's views on affirmative action.

    By picking Sotomayer he bypassed his real Nixon-in-China moment and showed his true colors on AA. Instead we get the DeGaulle in Algeria option.

    I am Lugash.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Steve - while you're gone, do us all a favor and don't go changin on us...ok?

    ReplyDelete
  10. "Hmmm, so who is approving these comments for posting?"

    Steve can't resist! He loves us too much.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Obama picked Sotomayor, an anti-White liberal latina.

    Possible Obama Supreme Court Pick Slapped Down Reverse Discrimination Case in One-Paragraph Opinion:

    U.S. Appeals Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor, mentioned as a possible Supreme Court nominee, voted to deny a racial discrimination claim in a 2008 decision. She dismissed the case in a one-paragraph statement that, in the opinion of one dissenting judge, ignored the evidence and did not even address the constitutional issues raised by the case.

    The case, Ricci v. DeStefano, involved a group of 19 white firefighters and one Hispanic firefighter who filed suit in 2003 claiming that the city of New Haven, Conn., engaged in racial discrimination when it threw out the results of two promotion tests because none of the city’s black applicants had passed the tests.

    Each of the plaintiffs had passed the exam. The case is currently before the U.S. Supreme Court.

    The city threw out the results because it feared potential lawsuits from activist groups if few or no minority candidates were promoted. The city also claimed that in addition to potential lawsuits, promotions based on the test results would undermine their goal of diversity in the Fire Department.

    The firefighters sued, arguing that New Haven was discriminating against them by deciding that the tests would promote too many white candidates and too few minorities.

    Federal Judge Janet Bond Arterton rejected the firefighters’ appeal, siding with the city and saying that no racial discrimination had occurred because the city didn’t promote anyone at all.

    U.S. Appeals Court Judge Sotomayor issued an order that affirmed Arterton’s decision, issuing a one-paragraph judgment that called Arterton’s ruling “thorough, thoughtful, and well reasoned,”

    ReplyDelete
  12. heh...let's prove if it accepts comments without moderation

    ReplyDelete
  13. Happy Memorial Day Stevie and all the loyal 'Steve-sters' in the Steve-O-Sphere!!!

    ReplyDelete
  14. This is hilarious:

    http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2905348

    It's from a major South Korean newspaper.

    Even the Orientals know what's up.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Wohoo, unmoderated free-for-all. Ransack the joint.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Looks like the S. Korean newspaper changed the title of the article I linked to above.

    The original title of the article was "A Jewish Mother's Dream."

    ReplyDelete

Comments are moderated, at whim.