Why the sudden flurry of attacks on whites for purported racism since about the time Mitt Romney wrapped up the Republican nomination? Several media figures have been fired: Naomi Schaefer Riley, John Derbyshire, Robert Weissberg, and others widely defamed (Lena Dunham, Lesley Arfin, and even Zooey Deschanel). What's behind this spring's hysteria among the chattering class?
Clearly, some whites are being punished to encourage the others. But ... to encourage the others to do what, precisely?
To not even think about not re-electing the black President. Don't go there. The message that's being sent is: bad stuff happens to people who don't like blacks, which, for practical purposes in 2012 can be defined as people whom blacks don't like, or whom blacks might not like if they ever noticed them.
The ultimate message is one that can't be sent publicly, at least not before a lot more ground is prepared via Two Minute Hates or Two Month Hates in the case of George Zimmerman:
Nice little gentrified downtown you've got there. It would be a shame if anything were to happen to it Election Night because some vibrant youths were displeased that their side lost.
Posts
61 comments:
The two primary risks of race riots this year are made all the worse with the adoption of social networking by black youth. Last summer they organized loose riot-lite groups for no reason all over the country. Twitter after an Obama defeat could help the situation get out of hand real quick.
I've read heaps about the potentiality of riots this year but nothing about the near-term and long-term impact these riots would have on the nation. Would whites just move farther away and the status quo remain?
"..vibrant youths..."
There's that dangerous red flag word again, 'vibrant'.
Soon as your realtor tells you that, get out of there fast.
Some of the hysteria has to do with repression. Both libs and cons accuse each other of 'racism', and so they put on this act of being SHOCKED when they find some on their side(though they've known of it all along). So, cons got rid of Derbyshire, and libs are ragging on Arfin. In a way, liberal Jews are saying to Arfin, 'Shhhhh. Look, we agree with you and know where you're coming from, but blacks are our political allies and very useful, SO DON'T ROCK THE BOAT and DON'T SPILL THE BEANS.'
It's like this. Suppose Sailer has some negative things to say about his neighbors and discusses such matters with his sons. But suppose his son loudly says--in earshot of neighbor--what Sailer said. It would be palm-on-head time for Sailer, and he'd say to his son angrily, 'It's something we say amongst ourselves, not something we say aloud so others can hear.'
When Obama beats on Romney with every dirty trick in the book, Romney better 'fight fair' and not pull out the 'gun'.
Obama is expected to raise a billion or so dollars for his reelection fund. This money is not coming out of the ghetto. Clearly, a lot of interests have lined up behind him and have invested in him. As with all investments there is the expectation that it will bear fruit at some point. However, he has to remain in office in order to express his gratitude in full to them and they are very anxious for him, and them, to succeed. Expect the election to be a circus with every identity, gender and class issue setting off huge amounts of smoke and noise, all the better to start stampedes amongst the public.
If riots happen, different cities will respond to them differently. I'm in NYC and I know that Bloomberg will respond exactly like London authorities did a while ago. But there are bound to be mayors who will respond more appropriately, who will save lives and property with their actions. A mayor like that can acquire folk hero-type status, maybe even become president some day.
Zimmerman did not take advantage of an option to have a quick trial. So it's being pushed back. Imagine the Perfect Storm of Black Rage, with a not-guilty for Zimmerman the same week as Obama losing the election.
Step away from the window Gladys, you don't want to see what's going on out on the streets.
I bet there will be minor rioting if he wins. The Lakers always draw out their couch-burning faction. If he loses and it's by a few points I do not envision violent unrest. However he does not command everyone in the mothership. If there is ballot chicanery in Virginia or Ohio and outcome becomes "seriously questioned" the rainbow mob that lives for such moments will seize the day, thus ratifying Zimmerman Weltanschauung for the 100th time
Several media figures have been fired: Naomi Schaefer Riley, John Derbyshire, Robert Weissberg,
You may add Stephanie Eisner.
Sounds right. Nice post.
The business that's being given to Girls is the most egregiously weird of the bunch, and what signals to me that something very strange is going on.
I've also been wondering what will happen in the event that Obama is not re-elected.
The leftist press has been making the case for some time that the only explanation for that eventuality would be that whites are hopelessly racist.
But, that's always the explanation for everything, isn't it?
I don't have any prediction about what will happen....
Seems to me a lot more people have lost their jobs in the last 25 years because someone called them racist than ever lost their jobs for being called Communists. Anyone keeping score?
people whom blacks don't like, or whom blacks might not like if they ever noticed them.
I wonder what percentage of blacks have ever heard of John Derbyshire, even now. Maybe two percent?
Lena Dunham was on "Fresh Air" the other day and apologized for her show's lack of diversity. She promises more people of color next season!
Steve, you perfectly crystalized in words what I have been feeling in the air. Thanks.
vibrant youths
Steve, please use the correct terminology: daring pack of kids. Or my preference, roguish troupe of whippersnappers.
"The business that's being given to Girls is the most egregiously weird of the bunch, and what signals to me that something very strange is going on."
Very strange indeed.
No question there is a purge going on: Buchanan, Judge Napalitano, Weisberg, Derbyshire, etc...
In my opinion suggesting that the purges are an implict threat to Whites that there will be riots if BO is not reelected is not a credible explanation, because most Whites who live outside of major cities (and most do) simply don't care if Blacks riot (and some even hope they do unfortunately).
If you have ever studied social phenomenon such as trends or fads or say revolutions (which are after all only an example of a type of political fad) they consistently exhibit classic bell shaped curve patterns (ie. very slow early growth followed by increasing accelleration to a peak which is then followed by a decline).
We appear to be in the early stages in a rise of White consciousness. It could take a while though to pick up steam, because it is starting from such a low base (like almost zero).
Steve, God bless him, was writing about these issues in the early 1990s so he had tremendous foresight.
Why do I say White consciousness is rising? Well if you observe main stream internent sites like Yahoo or or others and read the comments by readers you will have noticed an increasingly hostile tone toward the PC view of blacks and minorities over the last three or four years.
Yahoo had your typical pro Travon Martin op ed piece a while back (before all the phoney tapes and pictures had come to light) and the piece had about 10,000 comments at least 70% by my estimate were highly critical of the MSM PC view of the matter that the piece advocated.
The alternative media is making it impossible for the PTB to keep the narrative together.
If you still only read the Huffington Post or the NYT(which aggressively monitor un PC comments) or CNN (which just keeps un PC comments off the air) and you are a liberal then you are probably unaware of the tidal wave tsunami of White anger that is building up.
However, it still does not explain to me why the purge now and why the attempt to incite an anti- White backlash vis a vis the Martin case.
Several possibilities:
1. They are grasping at straws and trying to plug the holes which are sprouting in the narrative (ie. White Chritian males = Bad and Blacks, Hispanics, Jews, and everyone else = Good);
2. The purge is a warm up for a big crack down on hate speech coming up (closing down the internet with hate speech laws?);
3. Some other possibility I haven't thought of.
My best guess is three so I am eager to hear what other readers think.
Nice Jewish girl who goes to bed with a black man every night is fired for racism. So 2012.
However, it did catapult Mrs Riley to second place on the Google suggestion thingy for Naomis, behind only Naomi Watts.
Sorry, Misses Campbell, Wolf, Judd-- not to mention the original. Maybe next week...
Remember, there are disciplines, and there are 'studies'. Always dismiss the latter, no matter what word precedes it.
I don't know how much of a trend this is. I HAVE seen complaints about Seinfeld being too white while it was still in production. Why are people here saying that the criticism of Girls is unusual? People being fired for writing un-PC things: yes, I guess there's been more of that than usual lately, but I don't know if this is a part of the natural ebb and flow of such things or an actual new trend. The Trayvon histeria: there was the Duke lacrosse hysteria, there was that Jena 6 case. Stuff like that happens.
Whenever I hear Naomi, I think of Mama's Family.
http://youtu.be/ZmCiEv8nk2Y
OT/ PISA scores in China
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17585201
China's results in international education tests - which have never been published - are "remarkable", says Andreas Schleicher, responsible for the highly-influential Pisa tests.
In 2008 I remember there was much discussion about whether whites were lying when asked who they intended to vote for in order to avoid being called racist. It was felt that Obama would need to poll ahead of McCain by several times the margin of error to pull off a win.
Well, guess what folks? Whites weren't lying in 2008, but they are in 2012 because the level of racial intimidation has been taken up about 10 decibels. And yet Romney is ahead in the latest Rasmussen presidential election poll by more than the margin of error, for perhaps the first time.
Spock is going down.
Attacking Zooey Deschanel, is stupid, because if she is "racist" then there is no stigma to it. Same with Lena Dunham. Particularly since in the internet age, there is no shame, and also no punishment. People can and will vote for whomever they please, without repercussions. That's couch/shark jumping time.
Threatening people's property is stupid, as Machiavelli noted, either kill a man or leave him alone, to do him minor injury is to make an enemy for life.
I think the Girls thing is a shake-down Jessie Jackson style to give parts/writing jobs etc. to Black people. This was done to NBC by Maxine Waters a few years ago (which led to Black leads Undercovers, quickly canceled, and also canceled "the Event").
All these purges, it is the elites trying to make examples against the threat of the Tea Party. Dick Lugar is gone, history, and that scares people. Throwing people out of the establishment is meant I guess to prevent insider solidarity with the Tea Party/insurgency movement.
Suggestion: Open the 'Sailer School of Citizenism'.
Steve Sailer said:
What's behind this spring's hysteria among the chattering class? Clearly, some whites are being punished to encourage the others. But ... to encourage the others to do what, precisely? To not even think about not re-electing the black President. ...The ultimate message is one that can't be sent publicly,..Nice little gentrified downtown you've got there. It would be a shame if anything were to happen to it Election Night because some vibrant youths were displeased that their side lost.
I dunno, this seems a little paranoid to me. Although granted, the post-Romney nomination timing is a little suspicious.
I don't think that white intellectuals are all that worried about black rioters. I think they are more worried about their declining status in the age of wikipedia and social media.
The politically correct thuggery is a sign that the post-modern liberal media gate keepers are in a state of mild panic over their loss of the political control over the public genda and the reduction in their professional media prospects. The internet is weakening their grip on the bull horn. They don't like it so they are lashing out in the only way they know how, by issuing suppression orders on taboo violators. And having chronic offenders very publicly sacked.
The "policing of public discourse" has been happening for years, but e pre-internet days it was under the radar. Now that the media tables are turning it is being done more publicly in order to encourage the others. But it does not seem to be working.
More generally the post-modern liberal consensus, in both its New Right and New Left forms, is in a state of advanced decay. Economic liberalism (Masters of Universe-style) has failed, as has ethnic liberalism ie multicultualism. Europe is full of people who have had enough of the Brussels Consensus, ditto America with the Washington Consensus.
The MSM know this but they can do nothing to control the general public debate. Hence they confine themselves to suppressing and sacking dissidents who have the gall to expect a pay-check for their wretched pixel-stained endeavours.
I'd hate to be proven wrong on this for much more than the sake of being proven wrong... But I honestly don't think that large-scale race riots of the sort we last saw in 1992 Los Angeles are really that likely a phenomenon in contemporary America anymore. Oh, you'll get occasional flash mobs of "youths" that get drawn out in small packs to make mischief, go "polar bear hunting," whatever, the psychological impact of which is magnified much more today by cell-phone and security camera video hitting the web. And the Derbyshire rule remains prudent with regards to any large assembly of people that is or that turns predominantly underclass black, which always risks boiling over unpredictably into mayhem even without a provocation.
But the large-scale concentrations of underclass blacks who might pose a credible risk of a sustained riot that takes over city streets were largely pushed far out of most city centers where whites have gentrified, either into predominantly black cities and edge neighborhoods where few whites bother to go (e.g.: Detroit, Camden, parts of Baltimore or Oakland), or off into the hinterlands on Section 8 vouchers. I wouldn't want to be a white person hanging around Chicago's Grant Park or on the streets of any underclass black neighborhood on election night no matter what the outcome, but I think the risks of actual riots that would threaten a gentrified Whitopia anywhere are minimal. The chiefs are there, but I think the indians have all gone to the reservation.
"However, it did catapult Mrs Riley to second place on the Google suggestion thingy for Naomis, behind only Naomi Watts"
If you type in "John Derbyshire", Google Instant prompts "John Derbyshire racist" as the fourth option. There's no sinister PC agenda though, typing in "Black people" gives the prompt "Black people stole my car".
A Jewish woman married to a black guy with two black kids.
A mixed race Latino with a black grandmother.
These are the two main fighter/victims in the Left's recent Cultural Race War against Whitey.
Anon 9:12:
The megaphone monopoly is falling apart. I think that drives the change in tone among citizens.
For years and years, a not-all-that-large group of newspapers and TV networks could decide what ideas and facts were off limits, and those things just didn't show up in respectable news or opinion outlets. That has stopped working so well now--even if you can get the prestige media in the US not to talk about something, or to hammer all its stories about some subject into some narrative, blogs and foreign news sources and fringe news sources abound.
On dozens of blogs, stuff that can't be discussed in the respectable news sources gets discussed in depth--often with far more intelligent discussion and hard data than you'd get from whatever discussion was acceptable to NBC or the New York Times. Everything from police brutality to what the wars look like when you show the bodies has become visible to those who care to look. The limits on discussion, enforced by simply deciding that no ideas or opinions outside those limits will ever be heard in mainstream press, are losing their power as more and more of the people that matter find alternative sources of information.
It does seems to my secularist self that the fate of gay marriage isn't the country's biggest problem at the moment, OTOH that issue is certainly surpassed in sheer pointlessness by these nonsensical anti-racist virtue wars which, by design, cannot ever be won. So the vizier class if not the pharaoh himself is triangulating to run out the clock a bit. The huzzahs about birth control pills were only found to be working their magic on a sliver of the voters, and not the entire female population as was supposed. More to gain via race pride than gay pride. In my own time there were staged battles about school uniforms, assault weapons, etc. so it's hard to see this as new territory.
It seems those who wish to control the narrative have moved beyond stage one.
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."
- Arthur Schopenhauer
The metric I'm using is Oprah. If, after becoming a billionaire appealing to white women, she's losing $300 million plus, she's no longer every silly white hausfrau's black bestest friend. I feel a sea change coming.
Obama reelection is coming closer...
@ 9:12 anon
Liberals are not "unaware" of a "tsunami of white anger". They have been all too "aware" of white anti-black sentiment. So aware of it they have been fighting it where it didn't really exist for decades. The fundamental starting point of the liberal worldview is that whites hate blacks and are very very very angry.
As to your possibilities, I think #1 is the answer, but that we will probably see #2 in the not too distant future, especially if Obama stays in power (note I do not say wins because I do not think there will be an election). They can sense their power is slipping from them, and so they are doing what they've always done to maintain power. A when the only tool you have is a hammer situation.
I've read heaps about the potentiality of riots this year but nothing about the near-term and long-term impact these riots would have on the nation. Would whites just move farther away and the status quo remain?
Most blacks live in the South, yet most riots, historically, have occurred in major cities outside of the South. So I think we say that an armed white poplulace makes a difference, regardless of the proximity of blacks to whites. Even in central Floria, which is not even culturally southern, a Jewish Mestizo male will shoot a black male in defense of his neighborhood (A black male who lived in Miami and was probably unaware that a "white" male would actually attempt to defend himself). So those whites who have the most to fear from black rioters are hipsters in gentrified neighborhoods. They are almost hysterically scared of an Obama loss. In the rest of the country, life will go on.
In Knoxville, Tennessee, a very southern place (and home of the Knoxville Horror and seemingly incongruous gunk like this), the 1960s "civil rights" unrest is fresh in the old mandarins' memories. Was reading a book of local nostalgia photos intended for the tourist market, and noticed not only a large section devoted to lunch counter protests et al. but also a choice description of The Worst Thing That Ever Happened to Knoxville In The '60s, to wit: one expensive plate glass window was cracked in the business district. The cost of the window was cited.
This must never, ever happen again, was the subtext.
Dollars are very important to people who don't have many of them.
The stuck pig lashes out most violently when it is cornered.
Also a commenter above had it right when he said we may have reached Peak Narrative. Yahoo and Youtube comments sections -- the origin source of the newest great American comedy -- are overflowing with ostensibly white people flipping the bird to PC. Take a gander some time, it's hard to miss the sardonic rage and vicious ridicule of our "betters". Naturally, I expect this to lead to both sites eventually closing off their comments sections.
Wow!
Some of the comments on this thread are skirting dangerously close to what I've always assumed was a major Steve Sailer Taboo Topic...
This simply reeks of desperation for the MSM left, they must really think that Romney has a very good chance, despite all the hand wringing about how women won't vote for Romney because of Santorum. They are trying to make an implication of existential racism for not re-electing Obama that they think will turn some voters off to Romney. The problem for them is of course that the electorate has already elected a black president in 2008, so that charge isn't really going to play with a lot of people who aren't already on the left, so now they are implying that it will a " Long Hot 4 years " if you white people don't re-elect Obama. They are even going after a program on HBO, which is unapologetically left wing in any programming they have relating to politics, What a joke.
"Why do I say White consciousness is rising? Well if you observe main stream internent sites like Yahoo or or others and read the comments by readers you will have noticed an increasingly hostile tone toward the PC view of blacks and minorities over the last three or four years."
I've noticed the same trend, but I've also noticed it in personal conversations with the kind of people who used to rebuff such talk as impolite or wrong-headed.
"Why do I say White consciousness is rising? Well if you observe main stream internent sites like Yahoo or or others and read the comments by readers you will have noticed an increasingly hostile tone toward the PC view of blacks and minorities over the last three or four years."
The DOJ and Obama admin got off to a bad start in this area with their refusal to do anything about those club weilding Black Panthers at the polling place in IIR, Philly. That was a slap in the face to people who thought Obama and his DOJ would seek fairness, esp. in the area of race.
Then came the premature remarks of the Pres in the Skip Gates' incident and the idiotic beer summit.
Then, the careerist civil rights DOJ prosecutor resigning and going public over Holder's DOJ policy of never prosecuting a case against black or minority civil right's abusers was another consciousness-raising occurrence.
With each of these, whites and many non-blacks who had voted Obama were now scratching their heads, and that was made worse by Obama's seeming boot-licking of Muslims abroad. The conclusion of many white voters who had cast their lot with the Pres was that he was either anti-white and had used them or that his biases were such that they, whites and non-blacks, would always be the ones he saw as "the other." The naive among them said out loud, "But he's bi-racial. He of all people should be fair...."
I don't think it's been lost on white America either that the affluent he seeks to make into scapegoats for their success are certainly more likely to be white than any other race.
Joe the Plummer's words had new meaning to white Obama voters by this time early in the administration.
Fast and Furious cover-ups by Holder and DOJ have slowly eroded their belief that this guy is on their side.
Yes, there's more, but he got off to a rocky start with issues of trust in the white community, and I agree with you that the comments have multiplied every where I go. Some of my close friends, liberal whites, are not crazy about him, and while I think most will still vote Obama, they are California public employees so what else would one expect?
My non-public employee Democratic friends are much more in the center of the political spectrum and if their words so far mean anything, they'll vote Romney.
However, the Pres starts with a huge electoral advantage when CA and NY and WA and OR are off the map from the beginning and ironically, some of the battleground states, like Ohio, are not as poorly off as they were before their Republican governors were elected and made the business climate better so that has the possibility of actually hurting Romney.
You can't read much of anything on the net these days w/out the NYTimes being the butt of jokes.
This scares the hell out of those who love the kind of stuff the Times tries to sell.
The WAPost is not exactly happy either.
I heard some really crazy talk coming from the libs this morning on tv over Lugar's unseating.
My God, the man is 80, has lived in DC for over 35 years and has been so arrogant about his hold on his seat that he *hasn't even bothered to keep a residence* in the state he represents.
That, more than anything, was enough to tick off the most moderate of Hoosiers. However, all the libs can rant about is how the right has gone crazy.
That mantra is not selling.
The rash of black flash mob violence of the last year and the MSM's avoidance of it, the avoidance of mentioning the race of the mobs in every newspaper, urban and local throughout the land, has pissed off a whole lot of whites who have seen those pics on YouTube.
Yes, the new media is having an effect and yes, the comments on the net reflect that. "I can't trust what the media tell me at night on the nightly news" is the voice in people's heads.
I believe just last week I wrote a posting in which I also suggested that there was an implied threat of race riots from various Obama administration public representatives like Al Sharpton.
You wouldn't post that comment. Probably I assumed because I also said something like - "bring it on". Very well let me try again with out the inflammatory rhetoric.
Let me tippy-toe around this issue. The Obama administration thinks it's good for their re-election prospects to sponsor economic riots (the Occupy Movement). They also think it benefits them to sponsor race riots (The Martin-Zimmerman case).
In point of fact, riots of any kind hardly matter to a man who has been out of work for a year. It won't work.
Albertosaurus
I forgot death. Death (and injury) is another consequence of and association with antipathy toward blacks (e.g., American History X).
When Obama beats on Romney with every dirty trick in the book, Romney better 'fight fair' and not pull out the 'gun'.
I wonder how this would play out with a White pol who really had guts/a weaponized intellect. He dog whistles, media freaks out, he responds with, "wow, they really read a lot into that, shows where their heads are," throws the media onto the couch like Bugs Bunny gaming Elmer Fudd, etc?
Obama is expected to raise a billion or so dollars for his reelection fund.
Talking point for Romney. "You want change, or another 4 years with Wall Street's bag man? I'm okay, I don't need the money, how about Obama?" etc.
Lena Dunham was on "Fresh Air" the other day and apologized for her show's lack of diversity. She promises more people of color next season!
Sell, sell, sell! Ah well, there's always the next show.
2. The purge is a warm up for a big crack down on hate speech coming up (closing down the internet with hate speech laws?);
Am I the only one who thinks this would just weaponize the hackers? Or who thinks the gov't would lose a "war" with hackers? I think P2P networks would eclipse the existent networks if they really try to clamp down on the Internet; basically, TPTB would just be writing themselves out of the story.
Whenever I hear Naomi, I think of Mama's Family.
I could never watch that show. Something about the aesthetics always repelled me.
Spock is going down.
There's many a slip twixt the cup and the lip, but it doesn't look good for Obama at this point.
The metric I'm using is Oprah. If, after becoming a billionaire appealing to white women, she's losing $300 million plus, she's no longer every silly white hausfrau's black bestest friend. I feel a sea change coming.
Care to elaborate?
As to your possibilities, I think #1 is the answer, but that we will probably see #2 in the not too distant future, especially if Obama stays in power (note I do not say wins because I do not think there will be an election). They can sense their power is slipping from them, and so they are doing what they've always done to maintain power. A when the only tool you have is a hammer situation.
Whiskey, is that you?
The results for disadvantaged pupils would be the envy of any Western country, he says.
Yes, let's compare a few elite Chinese cities to western countries. Hey, I know, let's compare Hong Kong scores to the Congo's!
And if we could move a few hundred million blacks into western Europe...
I think it's very interesting that Bill O'Reilly is strongly pushing the unfairness/racism towards whites of the Norfolk black on white beating story.
O'Reilly IMO has a good radar of what middle america wants to discuss, and he senses that the pushing back against the taboo of discussing black on white violence, in light of the Zimmerman/martin MSM hype, is a net plus for his brand.
We shall see if O'Reilly's take will spill over into more MSM venues.
"I think it's very interesting that Bill O'Reilly is strongly pushing the unfairness/racism towards whites of the Norfolk black on white beating story."
Yes, he has jumped on it, although I've heard his pc crap spouted enough times to make me realize he's not much different than others.
If he were really different, he'd have covered all the flash mob violence by black youths but he didn't. He'd have covered a couple of other atttacks by blacks on whites in which witnesses heard, "This is for Trayvon."
"The message that's being sent is: bad stuff happens to people who don't like blacks'
Yes, and that's close to what I am hearing today from MSM regarding the gay marriage vote in NC and Obama's acceding in his interview today.
Wow, did he ever look whipped, just totally gay-pussy, media-pussy. Hollywood pussy-whipped in TRYING to explain his "evolution" on gay marriage.
All the time he was thinking, "Man, I got huge fund-raisers in HW coming up and tonight one with Ricky Martin, of all the damn people, and Clooney and Streisand and Damon all on my case. Marriage a "civil right" my ass, but shit. Gotta give 'em the bj they want and then swallow."
And that's what he did.
Think how bad the pressure was for him to do that considering NC is a toss-up state and Ohio too.
Why not have riots in the gentrified areas of the cities? The gentrifiers are, in my experience, the most self-righteous, holier-than-thou, morally self preening, minority sub cauda smoochers I have ever experienced. If their real estate values get cut in half, and a few windows get broken so what? I mean Lenin did say you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet. Romney would be President and the vanguard of liberalism, the gentrifiers, would be learning a lesson in the reality of irrationality.
I myself will be voting for Romney because I want to be just like the blacks, our new role models, who voted 95% for the O-man last time. I just want to emulate their ways.
"OT/ PISA scores in China
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17585201
China's results in international education tests - which have never been published - are "remarkable", says Andreas Schleicher, responsible for the highly-influential Pisa tests."
Fascinating. A totally unconnected BBC story I enjoyed: "Up to 90% of school leavers in major Asian cities are suffering from myopia - short-sightedness - a study suggests."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17942181
We just need to listen to Yan Shen. How dare whites call Asians grinds! Whites just need to accept they're inferior and/or emulate the hard work (not grinding!) of Asians until they too have 90% rates of short-sightedness among high-school graduates.
Buying a home in a gentrified enclave in an otherwise minority / black neighborhood is like building on a flood plain. Only a fool would build there. Of course New Orleans is both so in that case you would have to be doubly stupid.
Svigor, you're a smart guy. Google "OWN Network $300 million loss".
Anon 1:11:
I think you've got it backwards on Obama and gay marriage. He was in favor of it before he was running for president, IIRC, but then weasel-worded around that and related gay rights issues (like DADT) when he was running for president. I gather the donations from prominent gays were drying up, till he suddenly remembered his previous beliefs.
Similarly, Romney back in MA was famously pretty pro-gay-rights, though not pro-gay-marriage.
A cnic might almost think these guys don't really have principles or beliefs, so much as interests and ambitions.
Google "OWN Network $300 million loss".
Ah, her network. Well, that is a new venture. Not quite the same thing as suddenly taking a haircut on what was making you money for the last 20 years.
"Paul Mendez said...
Wow!
Some of the comments on this thread are skirting dangerously close to what I've always assumed was a major Steve Sailer Taboo Topic..."
Sorry, I am a little slow. Can someone explain to me what taboo topic this thread is skirting dangerously close to?
"Even in central Floria, which is not even culturally southern..."
By that twist of logic you could say that black rioting in Detroit, Newark, Chicago etc. was happening in places that were not culturally Northern. After all, the rioters did come from the South.
Plenty of recent black violence against whites has been in the hardcore Southern states like AL, SC, GA and LA.
Svigor, the website Black & Right has a post today called "The Endorsement That Toppled An Empire" about Oprah's 2008 Obama endorsement and the $330 million loss. It also quotes her as saying she wouldn't be endorsing him this year.
The metric I'm using is Oprah. If, after becoming a billionaire appealing to white women, she's losing $300 million plus, she's no longer every silly white hausfrau's black bestest friend. I feel a sea change coming.
And:
Losses at Oprah's TV channel approach $330M
Winfrey herself has relatively little money invested in the channel
=
This is why we trust, but verify.
^^^This is what I think of as the good side of "compassionate conservatism," lol. Don't trust shit, but cover with a soft, fuzzy-sounding platitude.
Not that the article doesn't support your conclusion, to an extent:
her image as the most successful TV star of her generation is on the line.
She should blame the brilliant "Scots-Irish" guy, it was all his idea.
Anonymous 5/9/12 at 7:22 AM,
George Zimmerman is not a "Jewish mestizo male." Zimmerman is not exclusively a Jewish name. He was raised Catholic, and no one has ever shown that his father was a Jewish Zimmerman.
Post a Comment