Chaim Amalek writes: So? If you were a rapist and had your pick of targets, who would you pick to rape? This sort of racist interpretation of what is essentially a market-driven decision has got to stop. NOW.
We must NEVER forget #EmmettTill…and NEVER mention how ridiculously lopsided modern interracial rape rates are. pic.twitter.com/gy1z1iGSyg
— Jim Goad (@jimgoad) August 30, 2016
Chaim Amalek writes: Nebech, living with a Muslim drove him CRAZY! But now he is free and available to some nice Jewish woman who can make him a good home and be ok with his texting (which is not forbidden by Torah). Ladies? Miriam? He’s available, he’s smart, he’s buff, and he wants to show you what he’s got.
Baltimore is typical of many Midwestern and Northern cities, whose demographics were forever changed by the great black migration of the twentieth century. Not unexpectedly we found a cognitive discontinuity at the city line. Surprising, however, was its magnitude. Whereas suburban mean IQs (86 for blacks, 99 for whites) conform more or less to national norms, city IQs are dreadfully low. With a mean IQ of 76, inner-city blacks fall about 0.6 SD below the African American average nationally. More than a third have death-penalty immunity on grounds of mental retardation. The inner-city white mean of 86 is nearly a full standard deviation below the national white average. By this measure, whites fared worse than blacks. Both groups are seriously deficient in human capital. Neither is very employable. To compound matters, we almost certainly have overstated urban IQs. City residents constitute a low-IQ group extracted from a more cognitively representative population. Their kids, whose test scores we analyzed, should have regressed toward their racial means, i.e., toward higher IQs. That is, inner city kids are smarter than their parents. Accordingly, our estimates of inner-city IQs are best regarded as upper bounds to adult values.
IQ hardens early in life, locking in the urban deficit. With few prospects for improvement, cities must look elsewhere for amelioration. While we all are aware of the advantages that accrue to the brightest among us, we also know that other qualities carry with them inestimable benefits. Traits like honesty, reliability, perseverance and self-discipline, when cultivated contribute to employability and to a more productive life in general. Indeed, for low-skilled jobs these latter qualities are more important than intellect. Unfortunately, casual observation finds such virtues also wanting.
Finally, we note that a problem cannot be solved until it is defined. This we have done. But where we see cognitive inadequacy, some will find only abject, hopeless misery. As for our efforts, we can be certain of only one thing — vilification. It could drive a man to pseudonymity
Dennis Prager writes: Given that the former secretary of state used her office to enrich herself and her husband; given that she so willfully compromised national security by setting up her own private email server in order to avoid congressional and public oversight; given that she has repeatedly lied about these actions; given that she lied to the mothers and fathers of the men killed by terrorists in Benghazi; and given that she has a long history of lying (a New York Times columnist called her a “congenital liar” in the 1990s), the notion of Clinton as a model for America’s girls and young women is nothing, if not depressing.
Steve Sailer writes: It’s hard to be a legendary lawyer outside your state boundaries.
Racehorse Haynes of Houston had a couple of national network miniseries made about his biggest cases in Texas, but he stuck to Texas.
Los Angeles has had famous lawyers like Johnnie Cochran, Gloria Allred, and Mark Geragos, but they stick to L.A.
