The worst writer for The Fix at the Washington Post is Janell Ross.
Nobody would care about Mexicans speaking Spanish in America if they did it in private while displaying fluency in English in public. Unfortunately, many Mexican-Americans tend to be illiterate in two languages rather than fluent in either.
There is a dark period in American history. It’s one to which some Americans seem eager to return. It’s one when people were barred, shamed or even punished for speaking languages other than English. That was especially true outside the home.
Speaking a foreign language or limited English was very widely believed to be an indicator of suspect national loyalty, limited intelligence or ability. Speaking a foreign language simply was not regarded as a useful skill.
And there were a whole range of dominant but nonetheless inaccurate theories about the way that children and adults actually acquire a second or third language that claimed an English-only lifestyle was best. Schools, businesses and all sorts of institutions in the Southwest and West barred kids from speaking Spanish and encouraged their parents to do the same at home.
Even worse, Spanish-speaking in particular became a target of American cultural purists who subscribed to some seriously circular logic. These folks — the majority of America — truly believed that which was white was that which was American. And therefore, that which was culturally white should be emulated and, when necessary, enforced.
That sense of cultural and intellectual superiority also provided some of the justification for a everything from voter suppression to economic exclusion, school segregation and human rights abuses. Just in case you are not aware, like African Americans around the South and Southwest, Mexican-Americans in those regions were almost uniformly subject to poll taxes and civics tests designed to keep Latinos from voting.
And we all know how black people love speaking Spanish and other foreign languages. I wonder how many languages Janell speaks?
According to the Washington Post: “Janell Ross is a reporter for The Fix who writes about race, gender, immigration and inequality.”
Prose: Whites had the highest scores followed by Asians/Pacific Islanders, Blacks, and Hispanics
Document: Whites and Asians/Pacific Islanders had the highest scores followed by Blacks and Hispanics
Quantitative: Whites had the highest scores followed by Asians/Pacific Islanders, and both Blacks and Hispanics
Changes between 1992 and 2003
White Adults
Up 9 points in quantitative
Black Adults
Up 6 points in prose, 8 points in document, and 16 points in quantitative
Hispanic Adults
Down 18 points in prose and 14 points in document
Asian/Pacific Islander Adults
Up 16 points in prose
According to the National Center for Education Statistics, about half of hispanics in America are basically illiterate in English, and the problem is getting worse. “Among Hispanics, the percentage with Below Basic prose literacy increased 9 percentage points between 1992 and 2003…” By contrast, only 7% of whites and 24% of blacks are this illiterate.
Janell Ross, who is identified by her employer, The Washington Post, as a straight news reporter, went on MSNBC to slime Jeb Bush with unsubstantiated innuendo. Ross’s objectively appalling and wildly inappropriate smear-by-rumor campaign was even too much for Alex Wagner, the openly left-wing MSNBC anchor hosting the hour:
ROSS: I guess I was surprised to hear that these things had been written in a book at a time when the Governor probably had his own issues that he was struggling with in his personal life; it seems like a strange time in your life to suggest that public shaming is a good way to address problems.
WAGNER: Explain. You’re intimating something now.
ROSS: I am and I’m trying to be as delicate as possible but in all honesty the Governor has some issues with his own family that some might argue are worthy of some public shaming.
WAGNER: To be fair, we don’t have– none of those have been corroborated. We have no reporting on that and NBC News cannot confirm any of that. You are a reporter for the Washington Post, if you have independent reporting on that…
Unless Ross is teasing a breaking story at the Washington Post, which does not seem likely, she isn’t just a Washington Post reporter working as a Democrat operative, she is a Washington Post reporter working as a sleazy Democrat operative seeking to damage a man and his family with nothing more than the kind of sleazy innuendo that even a MSNBC felt the need to disavow.
Republicans have long-believed the Washington Post is out to discredit and disqualify their candidates — and for good reason. Janell Ross (whose Twitter feed is a swamp of extreme-leftism), however, marks a new low in the Post’s sleazy and irresponsible jihad against the Right.
What Ross did is no different from Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) lying about Mitt Romney not paying his taxes. But this is the Washington Post engaging in these tactics.
Posted inBlacks, Journalism, Latino, Spanish|Comments Off on WP: What that Cruz-Rubio ‘He doesn’t speak Spanish’ thing was about
I used the “Look Inside” feature at Amazon.com and found zero mentions of “Auschwitz” in this book and zero mentions of “Holocaust.” What on earth was he talking to these Polish girls about?
According to the Amazon.com reviews:
* I’ve been a reader of Roosh’s blog for the past few years and he is not a sentimentalist when it comes to the female gender. So when he calls women of a particular country feminine and kind, it means a lot. I was able to visit Poland very briefly last summer and my interactions with Polish women, although brief, showed me how different they are from American women; so this book had a particular interest to me. If you want to find a country of thin, considerate women who aren’t interested in petty drama and BS, Poland is your place.
“Bang Poland” begins with a brief description of Polish culture and some logistics for your trip. Of course, we then gets into the heart of the book, the women of Poland and what style of game should be used on them. In contrast to the a-hole game that would be used on western women, Roosh describes the game that works on Polish women as “confident nice guy game.” You want to be a man who isn’t afraid to approach a woman but isn’t overly arrogant. Polish women are not as quick to jump into bed with a guy as women in other countries, so a Polish girl must be reassured that she is not a slut if she has sex with you. The book also includes Roosh’s most amusing stories from Poland, which can also be used as a guide of how to deal with difficult people in your way while abroad.
Posted inPoland|Comments Off on Bang Poland: How To Make Love With Polish Girls In Poland
Two weeks ago, I noted that the Republican Party has been digging itself an ever deeper electoral hole by tolerating (when not exacerbating) the lax immigration policies of the last four-plus decades. These caused demographic changes that are indisputably and inevitably deleterious to the GOP.
Yet, I pointed out, there remains a logical possibility that the country can avoid one-party Democratic rule even as far out as the middle of the 21st century. If all else remains equal, I calculated, Republican candidates could win in the 2048-2052 era simply by 1) increasing the GOP`s share of the white vote, from McCain`s 55 percent to 70 percent, and by 2) raising the white turnout level back to that seen in 1992.
At VDARE.COM, this fairly obvious but apparently unmentionable option is called the “Sailer Strategy”.
Of course, this arithmetic raises some difficult questions.
For example, how could the GOP go about deserving to get 70 percent of the white vote? That`s a question I can`t fully answer yet. But at least I`m thinking about it, which, I suspect, is more than you can say for anybody connected to the Republican Party in any official capacity.
Another difficult question is: How can the GOP keep “all else equal” while raising the white share of the vote?
…But let’s be realistic. Being, in essence, the white party makes the GOP uncool. And that’s only going to get worse as the impact of decades of indoctrination in the uncoolness of white people by the school system and MainStream Media continue to pile up.
Further, contra Karl Rove, the GOP will never be able to shake its white party image. It will either increase its share of the white vote or it will go out of business as a party capable of winning national power.
My suggestion: the only long-term option for the Republicans, the de facto white party, is to rebrand the Democrats as the de facto black party.
Not the Minority Party or the Cool, Hip, Multicultural Party—but the Black Party. Go with the flow of the fundamental Manichaeism of American thought: Black versus White.
Sure, it’s kind of retarded, but Americans, especially American intellectuals and pundits, aren’t good at thinking in terms of shades of brown. You can’t beat it, so use it.
Hispanics and Asians certainly will never be terribly happy with the idea of being junior partners in the white party. (Indeed, lots of white people have an allergy to belonging to the white party.) Hence, the alternative must be framed that if Hispanics and Asians don’t want to be junior partners in the white party, they get to be junior partners in the black party.
Black or white: choose one.
Or they can not choose and stay home on Election Day.
The subtle cunning of the tactic of rebranding the Democrats as the black party is not to criticize the Democrats for being the vehicle of African-American political activism, but to praise them for it, over and over, in the most offhand “everybody-knows” ways.
Republicans can hurry along the coming Democratic train wreck by, for example, lauding blacks as the “moral core” of the Democratic Party. Respectfully point out that the Democratic Party is the rightful agent for the assertion of African-American racial interests, and that advancing black interests is central to the nature of the Democratic Party. Note that, while individual blacks wishing to vote for the good of the country are more than welcome in the GOP, black racial activists have their natural home in the Democratic Party. That’s what the Democrats are there for.
Don’t argue it. Just treat it as a given.
Moreover, Republican rhetoric should encourage feelings of proprietariness among blacks toward their Democratic Party. It’s not all that hard to get blacks to feel that they morally deserve something, such as, for example, predominance in the Democratic Party. African-Americans are good at feeling that others owe them deference.
This kind of subtle language, casually repeated, puts Democrats in a delicate spot. Either they insult blacks by denying this presumption, or they alarm their Asian, Hispanic, and white supporters by not denying it. As everybody knows, but seldom says, black political control hasn’t worked out well for places as far apart as Detroit and Zimbabwe.
For instance, 2016 on the Democratic side will be interesting. If Obama wins re-election in 2012, blacks will argue, not unreasonably, that they’ve brought the Democrats political prosperity and therefore a black deserves a spot on the 2016 national ticket. If Obama loses re-election, the media will relentlessly blame it on white racism, and blacks in 2016 will demand a black candidate to fight the scourge of anti-black feelings.
Even if blacks are rebuffed by the Democrats in the 2016 nominating process, they aren’t going to vote Republican in the fall. But without a black on the ballot, they won’t show up to vote in quite the huge numbers seen in 2008.
Conversely, if the Democrats pander to blacks in 2016, thus establishing a precedent of a permanent black spot on the national ticket, that will raise severe questions in the rest of this awkward alliance.
As the black sense of rightful ascendancy in the Democratic Party becomes more pronounced, Hispanics will be demanding that their burgeoning numbers mean that it’s now their turn. Meanwhile, more Asians will wonder why they are supporting an agglomeration dominated by blacks who don’t share their values. And white Democrats will wonder how exactly they can prosper in a party where everybody else is allowed to speak out in internal disputes as representatives of a legitimately aggrieved racial group, but they aren’t.
The GOP faces a daunting future of their own making. Then, again, so do the Democrats. All Democrats should be helpfully assisted to confront this.
Posted inRepublicans|Comments Off on Democrats Are The Black Party, Republicans Are The White Party
As a Jew, I find it easy to slip into the thinking that we’re a tiny defenseless people continually assailed by our insane and genocidal enemies.
On the other hand, many non-Jews see Jewish domination of finance, media, law, and political influence and feel that their own people are weak and defenseless.
When one group asserts itself, it rarely results in simply neutral effects on other groups. All groups are in competition with each other for scarce resources. As one group rises, other groups are usually disadvantaged.
The New York Times, Monday, August 7, 1933:
Following is the text of Jewish lawyer Samuel Untermyer’s address last night over Station WABC after his return from Europe:
My Friends:
What a joy and relief and sense of security to be once more on American soil! The nightmares of horrors through which I have passed in those two weeks in Europe, listening to the heartbreaking tales of refugee victims, beggar description.
I deeply appreciate your enthusiastic greeting on my arrival today, which I quite understand is addressed not to me personally but to the holy war in the cause of humanity in which we are embarked. Jews and non-Jews alike, for we are equally concerned that the work of centuries shall not be undone, and that civilization shall not be allowed to die.
It is a war that must be waged unremittingly until the black clouds of bigotry, race hatred and fanaticism that have descended upon what was once Germany, but is now medieval Hitlerland, have been dispersed. If we will but enlist to a man and persist in our purpose, the bright sun of civilization will again shine upon Germany, and the world will be a safer place in which to dwell.
As our ship sailed up the bay today past our proud Statue of Liberty, [a gift to the U.S. from the Grand Orient – Illuminati – Lodge of France] I breathed a prayer of gratitude and thanksgiving that this fair land of freedom has escaped the curse that has descended upon benighted Germany, which has thereby been converted from a nation of culture into a veritable hell of cruel and savage beasts.
The World’s Concern
We owe it not only to our persecuted brethren but to the entire world to now strike in self-defense a blow that will free humanity from a repetition of this incredible outrage. This time the Jews are the victims, next time it may be the Catholics or the Protestants. If we once admit, as is brazenly insisted by the German Government, that such fiendish persecution of the people of one race or creed is an internal domestic affair and not a world concern, how are we to know whose turn will be next?
Now or never must all the nations of the earth make common cause against the monstrous claim that the slaughter, starvation and annihilation, by a country that has reverted to barbarism, of its own innocent and defenseless citizens without rhyme, reason or excuse is an internal affair against which the rest of the world must stand idly by and not lift a hand in defense.
I have seen and talked with many of these terror-stricken refugees who have had the good fortune to escape over the border, though forced to leave their property behind them, and I want to say to you that nothing that has seeped through to you over the rigid censorship and lying propaganda that are at work to conceal and misrepresent the situation of the Jews in Germany begins to tell a fraction of the frightful story of fiendish torture, cruelty and persecution that are being inflicted day by day upon these men, women and children, of the terrors of worse than death in which they are living.
When the tale is told, as it will be some day if the impotent League of Nations ever sufficiently awakens from its Rip Van Winkle slumbers to the realization of its power and duty to prosecute an investigation into the facts, the world will confront a picture so fearful in its barbarous cruelty that the hell of war and the alleged Belgian atrocities will pale into insignificance as compared to this devilishly, deliberately, cold-bloodedly planned and already partially executed campaign for the extermination of a proud, gentle, loyal, law-abiding people — a people who love and have shed their blood for their Fatherland, and to whom Germany owes in large part its prosperity and its great scientists, educators, lawyers, physicians, poets, musicians, diplomats and philosophers, who are the backbone of its past cultural life.
Back to Dark Ages
But why dwell longer upon this revolting picture of the ravages wrought by these ingrates and beasts of prey, animated by the loathsome motives of race hatred, bigotry and envy. For the Jews are the aristocrats of the world. From time immemorial they have been persecuted and have seen their persecutors come and go. They alone have survived. And so will history repeat itself, but that furnishes no reason why we should permit this reversion of a once great nation to the Dark Ages or fail to rescue these 600,000 human souls from the tortures of hell as we can with the aid of our Christian friends, if we have the will to act.
Protests and pleas from all corners of the earth, from the leaders of all creeds, having proven as vain and unavailing as was the idealistic dream of our martyred President of making the world safe for democracy and of protecting minorities, what then are to be the lines of our defensive campaign against these atrocities, on which we are already actively embarked? Are we right in our plan? If so, what steps shall now be prosecuted to attain success?
Our campaign is twofold — defensive and constructive. On the defensive side will be the economic boycott against all German goods, shipping and services. On the constructive side will be an appeal to the League of Nations to construe and enforce the labor union provisions of the Versailles Treaty and the written promises made by Germany, while the treaty was under negotiation, to protect its minorities, which have been flagrantly violated by its disfranchisement and persecution of the German Jews.
What Boycott Means
As in the boycott, strange to say a mere handful in number, but powerful in influence, of our thoughtless but doubtless well-intentioned Jews seem obsessed and frightened at the bare mention of the word “boycott”. It signifies and conjures up to them images of force and illegality, such as have on occasions in the past characterized struggles between labor unions and their employers. As these timid souls are capitalists and employers, the word and all that it implies are hateful to their ears.
In point of fact, it signifies nothing of the kind. These gentlemen do not know what they are talking or thinking about. Instead of surrendering to their vague fears and half-baked ideas, our first duty is to educate them as to what is meant by a purely defensive economic boycott, and what we are doing and proposing.
Admittedly, the boycott is our only really effective weapon. These gentlemen who are taking counsel of their groundless fears to the exclusion of their reason have done nothing and have no program except to attempt to arouse world opinion, which is and has been from the outset on our side, as it was bound to be because of this brutal, senseless, unprovoked assault upon civilization.
It is not necessary to belittle or underrate that accomplishment, if their aimless, fruitless endeavors in that direction may be so dignified in recognition of their good intentions, barren of results as they have been.
It is sufficient that their efforts have proven unavailing and that the campaign of Schreckligheit not only goes on unabated in the face of unanimous world opinion; but that it is increasing in intensity and that the masses of the German people, misled by government propaganda and suppression of free speech and of the press, are either voluntarily, or through fear of punishment at the hands of their despotic rulers, supporting their government in this hellish campaign.
What then have these amiable gentlemen accomplished and what do they hope or expect to accomplish in the way of stemming this conflagration of civilization by their “feather-duster” methods? You cannot put out a fire, and especially that kind of a fire, by just looking on until the mad flames, fanned by the wind of hate, have destroyed everything.
What we are proposing and have already gone far toward doing, is to prosecute a purely defensive economic boycott that will undermine the Hitler regime and bring the German people to their senses by destroying their export trade on which their very existence depends.
“Force Them to Learn”
They have flaunted and persisted in flaunting and defying world opinion.
We propose to and are organizing world opinion to express itself in the only way Germany can be made to understand. Hitler and his mob will not permit their people to know how they are regarded by the outside world. We shall force them to learn in the only way open to us.
Revolting as it is, it would be an interesting study in psychology to analyze the motives, other than fear and cowardice, that have prompted Jewish bankers to lend money to Germany as they are now doing. It is in part their money that is being used by the Hitler regime in its reckless, wicked campaign of propaganda to make the world anti-Semitic; with that money they have invaded Great Britain, the United States and other countries where they have established newspapers, subsidized agents and otherwise are spending untold millions in spreading their infamous creed.
The suggestion that they use that money toward paying the honest debts they have repudiated is answered only by contemptuous sneers and silence. Meantime the infamous campaign goes on unabated with ever increasing intensity to the everlasting disgrace of the Jewish bankers who are helping to finance it and of the weaklings who are doing nothing effective to check it.
The Hitler regime originated are fiendishly prosecuting their boycott to exterminate the Jews by placarding Jewish shops, warning Germans against dealing with them, by imprisoning Jewish shopkeepers and parading them through the streets by the hundreds under guard of Nazi troops for the sole crime of being Jews, by ejecting them from the learned professions in which many of them had attained eminence, by excluding their children from the schools, their men from the labor unions, closing against them every avenue of livelihood, locking them in vile concentration camps, starving and torturing them, murdering and beating them without cause and resorting to every other conceivable form of torture, inhuman beyond conception, until suicide has become their only means of escape, and all solely because they are or their remote ancestors were Jews, and all with the avowed object of exterminating them.
Appeal to Mankind
As against this, the foulest boycott in the annals of time, we are appealing to all mankind to enforce a counter-boycott. That appeal is meeting with the conviction that idealism and justice are still alive.
There is nothing new in the use of the economic boycott as an instrument of justice. The covenant of the League of Nations expressly provides in these identical words for its use to bring recalcitrant nations to terms. President Roosevelt, whose wise statesmanship and vision are the wonder of the civilized world, is invoking it in furtherance of his noble conception for the readjustment of the relations between capital and labor under the terms of the sweeping Industrial Recovery Act, to the end that labor shall receive a more just share of the wealth it creates. He is about to enlist the consumers of the country in a national campaign in which they pledge themselves to boycott all manufacturers, jobbers and retailers who fail to subscribe to the codes and to buy only from those who have assented and who are thereby privileged to fly the blue eagle of NRA [National Recovery Act]. What more exalted precedent do our timid friends want?
With this explanation of our aims, I appeal to the American Jewish Committee, whose public spirit and good intentions I do not for a moment question, but the wisdom of whose judgment I challenge, no longer to hold aloof but to rid themselves of their timid and ill-considered prejudices and join in actively pressing this boycott as our only weapon except the appeal to the League, which I shall discuss at a later time.
I purposely refrain from including the American Jewish Congress in this appeal because I am satisfied that 95 per cent of their members are already with us and that they are being misrepresented by two or three men now abroad. Of them I ask that, prior to the meeting to be held this month in Prague by their executive committee, they instruct these false leaders in no uncertain terms as to the stand they must take on this all-important subject and demand that they shall either openly represent their views or resign their offices. One of them, generally recognized as the kingpin of mischief makers, is junketing around the Continent engaged in his favorite pastime of spreading discord, asserting at one time and place that he favors and supports the boycott and at another that he is opposed or indifferent to it, all dependent on the audience he is addressing; but always directly or indirectly delivering a stab in the dark.
Progress So Far Made
There is not time now, but I hope and expect in the near future to be able to report to you the steps that have been taken and that are already under way, and the surprising and gratifying progress already made in many countries toward the success of the economic boycott in which we are engaged. Although considerable progress in that direction has already been made in Great Britain and in the United States, you will be surprised to learn that they are the least advanced and as yet the most inadequately organized of all the countries that were represented at the Amsterdam World Economic Conference, where the boycott was unanimously and enthusiastically approved by formal resolution by a rising vote.
With us in America the delay has been due in part to lack of funds and the vast territory to be covered, but it is hoped, and expected, that this condition will soon be corrected. The object-lesson we are determined to teach is so priceless to all humanity that we dare not fall.
Each of you, Jew and Gentile alike, who has not already enlisted in this sacred war should do so now and here. It is not sufficient that you buy no goods made in Germany. You must refuse to deal with any merchant or shopkeeper who sells any German-made goods or who patronizes German ships or shipping.
To our shame be it said that there are a few Jews among us, but fortunately only a few, so wanting in dignity and self-respect that they are willing to travel on German ships where they are despised and meet with the just contempt of the servants who wait upon them and of their fellow passengers. Their names should be heralded far and wide. They are traitors to their race.
In conclusion, permit me again to thank you for this heartening reception and to assure you that, with your support and that of our millions of non-Jewish friends, we will drive the last nail in the coffin of bigotry and fanaticism that has dared raise its ugly head to slander, belie and disgrace twentieth century civilization.
Posted inGermany, Jews|Comments Off on Jews and Germany 1933
* “Hillary Campaigns to be America’s Third Black President”
Modelling yourself after the only living two-term Democratic presidents seems wise, no?
The high/low strategy of simultaneously appealing to affluent suburban whites and poor minorities wins elections, even if it doesn’t lend itself to great policy.
The Sanders strategy of trying to get working class white Americans to embrace left-wing politics has been attempted, and resoundingly failed in 1972 and 1984.
* If I recall correctly from 2009, Obama did very little, if anything, at crafting the health care legislation. He basically let Pelosi and Reid run the show, and they turned it over to an army of staffers and insiders who wrote the legislation. Obama seemed highly detached.
Yet the GOPers call it ‘Obamacare’ and apparently the blacks think if you criticize it you are criticizing him.
* Does she effect an urban accent when she talks to black voters?
* I wonder if she’s droppin’ her g’s and doin’ that black singsong like she did when she was runnin’ against Obama.
That was funny. What was really funny was Obama doin’ it, too.
Duelin’ Negroes.
* Funny how a paper can have a paywall and still think walls don’t work.
* This “You ran against him” line of attack is puzzling to me because I believe my memory isn’t completely shot, yet H2008 I recall having a slew of black pols lined up to support her; while Barry had famed soul musician Edward M. Kennedy in his corner. Pace retconning, the black electorate (seemed) not in total embrace of the Harvard exotic– for a healthy chunk it was more of a fairly gradual adoption combined with a bandwagoning effect after the initial primaries. Could it be that elite white disdain of Ms. Rodham, for her audacity of running against The One back then, has had all kinds of time to trickle down and be imbibed, after a fashion, by black taste-testers as well?
If so, Obamadmin has f’ed up the Democratic enterprise even more than I’d realized, spending way too much of his tenure rousing anti-white feeling which mostly glanced off the GOP while inflicting internal bleeding for top white Democrats such as his heiress apparent…
* I’m buying more into this idea that Hillary’s base is gay men & bitter bra-burner clingers. These are the people who will stick with her to the end because it’s not important to them how she performs, just who she is. And I’m guessing they’re not a numerical juggernaut (as Howard Dean observed, writing off the Confederate-flag gun-rack pickup drivers was perhaps overly hasty; who knows if we’ll need those later?) But in terms of connecting with appreciable numbers of various voter blocs she just sucks at it. It’s not even that Bernie is the second coming of Huey Long, either. He just loves to pontificate & politick, while Hillary treats answering a press softball as a hideous chore.
* It’s getting harder and harder to believe democracy is the least bad system let alone a good one, especially a multiracial democracy. The founders never intended for borderline-moron sub-saharans to be able to vote.
* Sanders would be doing better with blacks if he where not Jewish.
* I’m rather shocked by the amount of hostility shown to Sanders by so many elements of the D establishment and grassroots. Makes me wonder how much of it is resentment over his very white core supporters and how much is just the Clinton machine calling in all it’s favors.
I still think Clinton will beat him, but on the off-chance she loses for the second and God-willing final time the wailing and gnashing of teeth will be wondrous to behold.
* “Obama’s legacy of helping blacks”? I don’t discount his importance to this demographic as a totem, but other than perhaps the expansion of Medicaid and food stamps I am hard pressed to think of any policy of his that “helped” blacks at all. In fact, his highest profile accomplishments all seemed to be items off the white SJW laundry list, and his record on immigration runs directly contrary to the best interests of black Americans.
To the extent that Clinton has any appeal to blacks, I would chalk it up to nostalgia for her husband and as a former cabinet member she served our first black president (which I guess is helping A black person).
* I’ve come to the extremely reluctant conclusion that single-payer is the only way out of this.
What I’d really like would be for people to pay for doctors and drugs out of pocket and have medical insurance be just that: the thing you buy to cover risks you can’t afford all at once. But for political and other reasons that’s never gonna happen, and at least with single-payer you might wring some of the legal fees and other nonsense out of the current system.
Personally, I find it a very strange thing to have concluded. But I can’t see where I’m wrong.
* It’s one of those things like police forces that are better off being done by the government.
Healthy people won’t buy insurance and the whole thing will never be economical. You make the people absorb costs, they avoid medical care and don’t do preventive medicine, and costs wind up being higher and health worse.
Also, if it’s for-profit, doctors and hospitals have incentives to do procedures patients don’t need, insurance companies have incentives to deny people care for stupid reasons, and so on.
We spend the most money and have some of the worst health outcomes in the developed world.
* I am not surprised by the criticizing Obamacare = criticizing Obama. In my experience, people who adore Obama find it impossible to divorce criticism of Obama with criticism of blacks in general.
In discussions I’ve had with leftist friends who have more or less insisted that criticism of Obama = criticism of blacks, and is racist.
* What would be best is to move as much of the health care industry into the free market, and just give government guarantees to the needy and those with “preexisting conditions”; and require catastrophic insurance coverage for all (either through a national system or through an PPACA-style mandate). If the health care industry loses the profit motive and other market forces, the allocation of resources will become even more distorted, and both costs will become too high and supply will become too scarce.
Whether this can win in a democratic republic with an entrenched bureaucracy and well-armed special interests is another question. (And the answer is no.)
Maybe a compromise would be enactment of a single-payer system but allow deregulation of medical care sought outside the single-payer system. This would allow profit seekers to provide quicker services to those who want them, and for innovators to make money off of new technologies, medicines, and techniques. The customer would then have a choice between paying to see a doctor today, or waiting 3 weeks for a free visit to his Berniecare doctor. It would be like traveling to Costa Rica for an operation, but without having to fly to Costa Rica.
* How is medical care any different than any other service? It’s not. Are VA hospitals run well? Do we all think the IRS, DMV, public schools and Post Office do a great job? Single payer may work politically, but is it better for most people? Seems unlikely.
* Government should confine itself to the provision of truly public goods which, to go on a tangent, education is definitely not. It is highly debatable whether medical care is actually a public good.
There is no such thing as “health insurance.” Insurance is for non-normal casualties. Everybody gets old and sick. Health is not insurable. It’s really just a system of transfer payments from young, healthy people to old, sick people. Maybe we can characterize it as a “pre-paid medical plan.” I don’t know.
There is no such thing as “preventive medicine.” Preventive medicine really means don’t smoke, drink in moderation, eat right, exercise and avoid risky activities. An obese 55-year old who watches 4 hours of TV and drinks a six-pack a day and isn’t having his blood sugar monitored is already sick. Subsidizing his doctor visits so he’ll go ahead and get on his subsidized insulin and we can pay for his increasingly decrepit existence for another 15 years is not an economic outcome.
Having said that, one would think out of the $6+T in combined government revenues we could craft a system that provides medical care at some level for all Americans. It won’t work, social democracy never does, but it seems pretty fruitless to oppose this particular tide.
* All Killary has to do is hire some BLM goons (preferably, women) to confront Sanders. He will run away. Problem solved.
* Is this pathetic or what? Africans who come here have their minds blown by all the catering to American blacks via affirmative action, welfare and other handouts and genuflecting by idiot Democrats like Hill and Bill. A Martian visitor would think the black race are the resident geniuses on this planet. Bono (U2) started a lot of this crap. I wish blacks well but I don’t believe in such pandering and elevation of the non-deserving.
* Hill and Bill are visibly denaturing, like the (Godwin trigger warning) Nazis at the end of “Raiders of the Lost Ark.” I wonder if she’ll stroke out on camera?
* Welcome to Election 2016 Bambata! Being the passive-aggressive, snarky little bitches they are, I wasn’t at all surprised to learn “this is why we can’t have nice things” to be a favorite debating technique among SWPL/hipster dweebs, yet I’m still amazed how dim they are to the fact this particular line of argument applies a fortiori to their own mania for diversity. So among the long list of nice things we can’t have because of diversity (including good mass transportation, decent public schools, and cool youth hostels) now add nice, clean, high-minded socialist runs for President. I mean, yeah, I don’t want a socialist Presidential candidate any more than the rest of you, but if one is going to exist it should be resisted by intelligent, informed arguments instead of moronic, self-defeating appeals to Big Man face-saving. But hey, you gotta give this to black people- they not only show up, they show up in custom-ink T-shirts just right for the occasion!
* So it’s not enough to just defend the interests of black people. The radical activists demand that Democratic candidates actively dump on white people, even poor whites. Fortunately, Sanders doesn’t seem to be having any of it.
* What blacks want can perhaps best be understood in light of the old nazi slogan:
“We don’t want higher bread prices! We don’t want lower bread prices! We want national socialist bread prices!”.
They don’t seem to care so much what they get, as long as it can be deemed authentically black.
* Intelligent, responsible healthy people will buy (and have bought) insurance to deal with major illnesses, just as intelligent responsible people have always bought car insurance. Automobile insurance existed and was widely used for a long time before the passage of laws making it a legal requirement.
All that government intervention has done is thrown all the stupid irresponsible people in the same insurance pool with the rest of us.
* You may be right about the single-payer system. It may be inevitable, at least in some form. As someone put it, not entirely facetiously, why not just “drop the number ’65′ from Medicare.” Watch for more and more hospices to open up as a consequence thereof . It is no coincidence that the hospice system emerged coincident with the emergence of socialized medicine. In ’99 my wife was diagnosed with stage-4 lymphoma. Stage 5 and it’s lights out. We had private health insurance. She beat it. If we were living in Europe she would have been long gone.
Everything has its price. There is “no free lunch.” Nor is there free medical care. Not under a single payer system. Not in ANY system.
* Hillary has an advantage with black voters because they don’t care if you’ve been (or are going) to prison or not.
* Charles Murray has been nothing but a curmudgeonly, elitist naysayer since Trump arrived on the political scene. All he can do is complain endlessly on (social) media about how terribly vulgar and uncouth the upstart is. He offers nothing in the way of a better option. How disappointingly ironic that he stand as a example of the very classism he’d spent his scholastic career warning against.
* The more I hear from Muslims in the US the more I agree. Their values are not ours nor will they ever be.
* Buchanan was too much like a bull dog.
Trump is more like a wolf at a dog show.
“Too many candidates” surely helped him.
* Bill Clinton was our first Black President. BO was our first affirmative action President. There is a difference.
* Yes, she does alter her accent and cadence when speaking to black audiences, like Obama does and Bill did. She affects a sort of Southern type accent.
* US has about the *best* health outcomes in the world when you take HBD into account. I.e. Japanese women are the longest lived national\sex group, but Japanese American women live even longer. Our Swedes live longer than Sweden’s Swedes. Our English live longer than the English. Our Irish live longer than the Irish. Our Mexicans live longer than Mexicans. And of course our blacks live way, way, way longer than Africans. And this is all the more remarkable considering how darn fat we are.
US healthcare is the most expensive but also the world’s finest in knocking out issues that can kill you.
Why overall US health comes are lower than some other developed countries is because we are a way, way more diverse country.
* Did anyone see the video of Bill standing next to Hillary at some recent campaign event? He was gaping vacantly while somebody was talking to him. Does he have alzheimers or something? He looked completely out of it.
* In some ways, this is just a taste of what is to come in future elections. The dilemma for Democrats will be to either run a white Presidential candidate and watched them get picked to shreds or a black or brown one that will drive white Republican turnout and defections from their own party. The fun part will be the fracas between brown and black. I’m not so sure blacks are down with “se habla Espaniol”. White liberals will just become a rump.
* Bernie can offer the ultimate in reparations: comfort women. Drawn from the excitable white coeds at his rallies.
* The obvious question with “single-payer” is who that single payer is going to be. I have suggested assigning the role to the Vatican. But I don’t think that’s who Bernie & Co. have in mind.
That single payer will decide what the single piper plays, so you’d better choose carefully. I’d be very wary of the entity charged with enforcing our immigration laws, for example.
* High medical costs are the trade-off we pay for ensuring some of our brightest and most capable young people become doctors, geneticists, and pharmacological researchers instead of all trying to hit the jackpot creating the next Slutchat photo sharing app.
A great outside-the-box political wedge issue (any Trump campaign staffers listening in, please feel free to run with it) would be imposing tariffs on European trade until they started paying their fair share for medical research leading to new drugs and devices. You do realize, right, that if Europeans did not have access to all the new medical products the put-upon US health consumer is paying for almost exclusively (through our market-based prices, and not some national health board whose almost at-cost diktat pricing schemes would ensure these products never got made) socialized medicine across the pond would quickly look a lot less enviable.
* I also am tired of the bashing of modern American Medicine. We are the world’s hospital. In no field is American Exceptionalism more apparent than medicine. You all can use the Nigerian and Indian-educated MDs coming under the ACA. Not me, not those I love.
* “Single payer” just means that the same bureaucracy that administers Medicare would do the same for everyone.
The alternative to “single payer” is private health care insurance. When you pay $1.00 into your private health insurance plan, you get back about 83 cents in actual health care; the rest goes to pay for all those ads you see on TV, customer service reps that deny you coverage, corporate jets and high salaries for executives and profits for stockholders. UnitedHealth Group, the largest health insurer, reported that for 2014 it made $10.3 billion in profits. That’s $10.3 billion that it could have spent on better care, but gave to its stockholders instead.
For every $1.00 that Americans put into Medicare, we get 98 cents in actual health care.
I think its pretty obvious that “single payer”, i.e. Medicare for all, is a better idea. However, I’ll bet that $10.3 billion bought a lot of lobbyists and PACs for UnitedHealth Group, so for those who hate “single payer”, it’ll never happen. Nor will you ever see a truly competitive health care insurance marketplace, which is probably Trump’s fallback, if he can’t get real Canadian style single payer.
* When a company faces less competition, it can distribute profits to executives and shareholders instead of plowing profits into investment. When it faces competition, it has to defer distributing profits to execs and shareholders and must invest to ensure future profits. Single-payer eliminates all competition and turns the market into a monopsony with a single buyer. It achieves lower consumer prices because as the sole buyer in the market it has bargaining power. But it has no incentive to offer new and better healthcare. There’s no reason to with no competition. It’s just an expense for a non-profit monopsonist.
* The African-American community disregard the fact that Sanders want to give them more goodies such as universal healthcare. For them it is not the policy as such that matters but who is delivering the policy. Hence, a black democrat using the same leftist Civil-Rights oratory as Barack Obama would see his/her policy supported by the black community even if his/her policy deprived the African-American community from everything.
It reminds about the strategic used by South African ANC and Zimbabwean ZANU-PF. Their politics have been a horrifying experience for black South Africans and black Zimbabwean. Nevertheless, a vast majority continue to support both the ANC and the Mugabe government.
The motivation is simply that they prefer a black nationalist party or leader over a party or leader who includes the white minority – even the second would be a better choice.
This is however not unique for African-Americans or black Africans. All Non-European groups – even economically prosperous groups such as Chinese, Koreans, Jews and Japanese seem to follow similar pattern. You see the same irrational behaviour among white Americans although not so directly bounded to race but rather abstract ideas of how the reality ought to be and what we should strive for. Libertarianism and socialism seem to be extremely appealing for Scandinavians.
The egalitarian view on ethnicity, religion, culture and traditionalism seem mostly sanctioned from above – Historically by Christian churches and today by societal elites. Throughout history Whites/Europeans has been extremely cruel towards Non-Whites/Non-Europeans in their struggle for conquest. If I see through the eyes of African-Americans I can understand that they distrust white Americans as they have always been on the bottom of the society. Naturally, they seek to promote their self-interest and election an African-American is natural for them.
Mike Duggans mayoral victory in Detroit show that African-Americans (although a rare example) is not always putting racial preferences first. He was the first white mayor since Roman Gribbs (1970-1974). I guess Detroit (90 percent non-white) had no choice.
In Detroit the Democratic politician (since Jerome Cavanagh who was elected in 1962) turned it something into literally a third world city and did in 50 years. Major cities such as Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Cleveland and St. Louis has lost more than half of their population since 1950 but still they have been able to keep the infrastructure fairly intact and children could actually read when they left high school. I wonder how deep in doh-doh this country has to go into people vote for politicians who actually promote the interest of Americans rather than the vested interest.
* Remember that “single-payer” only affects payments, it’s health care insurance, not the delivery of health care. There is plenty of room for private, for-pay medical care systems to demonstrate efficiency, compete with superior care, etc.
* To disregard the fact that Sanders is offering more Free Stuff would presuppose that black voters even know about and understand the Sanders platform. That’s not the case. Most black voters are completely oblivious. All they know is that there’s this thing called Obamacare that Obama did, and the black leadership and their allies like Hillary can get black voters to oppose any alternatives because they don’t understand the alternatives.
* Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries are subsidized by private insurance. The amount they pay providers such as doctors and hospitals is frequently below the actual cost to deliver services. The difference is made up by increasing the cost for people with private insurance. This is why so many doctors cap the number of Medicare and Medicaid patients they will see.
Steve Sailer writes: One of the weirder contradictions of contemporary dogma is the belief that race does not exist combined with the government’s obsession with counting everybody by self-identified race. If race doesn’t exist, you’d think that, say, the Obama Administration would be under a lot of pressure from its supporters to dump the racial/ethnic classification system. Strangely enough, it never seems to occur to all the True Believers to ask their friends running the federal government to change the system.
About 15 years ago, I wrote a long series of articles for VDARE in which I started out with a lot of anecdotes I had saved up over the years about how absurd the government’s racial/ethnic classification system was. But by the time I had gotten to the end, it struck me that the methods were, well, good enough for government work.
One of the common cliches is that race doesn’t exist at the genetic level. But there’s almost never any citation of the huge amount of data generated by genome analyses in the 21st century, which says the opposite.
In reality, not only does race pretty much exist, but self-identification is, at present, a reasonable way to get at the genetic reality.
COMMENTS:
* If races are, as Steve Sailer has said, very large in-bred populations, wouldn’t it make sense that a person would know their own family, even if it’s a big one?
Denying races existing but enforcing laws against racism strikes me as denying witches exist but enforcing laws against witchcraft.
* Do shoes exist? On the one hand, you would think, obviously, ‘yes.’ On the other hand: we have shoes. We have boots. What do you call a shoe with a heel? Or a shoe with extra ankle support? What do you call a shoe that is designed with vibram soles, is brown, and is intended to be used to hike in the woods? Is it a shoe or a boot? What do you call a low cut boot with laces? On the fringes, it is hard to tell.
Since shoes (and boots) can’t be fully distinctly defined, shoes (and boots) do not exist.
This frivolous example has a purpose. The entire argument is Wittgenstein, and his ‘family resemblances.’
* Check out your local SS offices that dispense disability and other goodies. I hear that only foreigners and minorities are employed there and that they give their homies inside track on scoring disability etc. IOW you have to know someone and bribe that someone who just so happens to be the same ethnic group as you, be it black, muslim, Hispanic, angry Samoan, Aleutian Islander and so on…
—IOW close enough for affirmative action government work. A limping disabled white man on crutches who goes in there will never get a thing.
* Race definitely exists for the driver of the bus I’m taking to work right now, who just let one of his fellow black guys on without paying.
* Races exist, but they are fuzzy around the edges and there is no scientific test that can determine precisely where the borders lie. For example, if Dred Scott was still in force, there would be no completely accurate way to determine whether certain individuals were citizens or farm machinery.
One would have to make up laws, for example that race was determined by the mother, not the father, or by either, or by mandatory DNA testing.
That is why government would rather not make laws that differentiate on race, except a few giving preferences to descendants of slaves, which don’t work very effectively, because they also benefit many people who are not the descendants of slaves. For example Barack Obama gets a racial preference just like his daughters who ARE descendants of slaves, which he is not. Colin Powell is a descendant of slaves, but not slaves in the US, but apparently also has ancestors who were not slaves, and so on.
However we don’t have laws that make killing a white person homicide and killing a black person a property offense, which would be the case if Dred Scott had not been reversed.
* Skin color and DNA sequences are both equally physical manifestations of the reality of race. There is nothing magical about DNA, but most people can’t break the habit of thinking about it as if it were some kind of ghost in the machine. It is not a ghost in the machine. In fact, it’s not even the machine. It is simply an organ system like the digestive tract—the system responsible for protein synthesis—whose workings should not be considered any more mysterious than the latter just because it is microscopic.
Race is first and foremost a spiritual reality. It is derivatively a biological reality. Both are malleable within certain limits, but the situation is extremely complicated and the degree of blinking away racial realities demanded by our current social structure has already reached and exceeded the limits of malleability. It’s time to stop now.
* Ask a liberal academic doctor “Is race a social construct?” or “Is there such a thing as race?” If you ask them in a social context, they will give the politically correct answer “There is no such thing as race.”
However, if you go to their office for a medical problem, the first thing they do is profile you according to race and national/ethnic group. Because it’s handy. Blacks are more likely to have sickle cell and colon cancer, Ashkenazi jews are more likely to have Tay-Sachs, east asians are most likely lactose intolerant, and so on. The CDC website will provide you with graphs of incidence rates sorted by race and ethnicity.
Read Nicholas Wade’s “A Troublesome Inheritance” for another perspective on genes and race.
* Race is downplayed when advocating mass immigration or sharing government resources and government redistribution. Race is hyped when advocating racial injustice and affirmative action racial redistribution and also when emotionally firing up a racial demographic.
Everyone knows race exists. Also, everyone knows that the government racial taxonomy is highly flawed. Hindu Asians are obviously different than Han Chinese Asians, that’s blatantly obvious to everyone. But, self reported racial taxonomies are basically impossible to get right. Ideally, move to a spit test derived ethnic profile that fully compensates for admixture, but that would be politically difficult.
* Years ago I attended a lecture at UVM (University of Vermont) entitled, “Can Race be Erased?” The researchers (I think that they were from UCLA) were seeing if in certain experiments subjects could be induced not to recognize or remember the race of the persons pictured. I don’t remember the precise methodology. They said that your brain automatically encodes three things when you first meet someone: sex, approximate age and race. Automatic encoding means that there’s nothing you can do to prevent it; it occurs at an unconscious level. The first two factors are probably related to reproduction–is this person a potential reproductive partner? Race, the researchers said, is probably a “friend or foe” identifier. In the ancestral environment incorrectly identifying an enemy could be quickly and unpleasantly fatal–you needed every clue you could get.
* I recently had my first child. The New York State forms to get a birth certificate were telling.
First it’s split into Hispanic and Non-Hispanic. Then the non-Hispanic options are: White, Black / African-American, and then *thirteen* types of Asian. So according to them, Saudis and Swedes fall into the same category, while Koreans and Japanese should be counted separately. Seriously, who comes up with this stuff?
* The left-liberal argument is that races are superficial categories (based on skin colour and facial appearance) which whites over-emphasise to put down minorities.
However, why it is that whites are able to successfully “put down” some minorities and not others. Why for example, do East Asians and middle-class South Asians often out-perform whites, if whites have successfully stereotyped them into superficial categories for the purposes of putting them down.
Similarly, if whites put blacks into a superificial category to oppress them, why do these people self-identify as black so much? The only possible reasons are that blacks naturally self-identify as black, and so can’t help themselves, or that the AA benefits of identifying as black outweigh the disadvantages. Either way the argument that whites have put blacks into an artificial category that puts them at a disadvantage is very weak.
If blacks were the same as whites (other than in appearance) then the most rebellious thing for blacks to do would be to act as white as possible. Following liberal logic, that would also be the most effective way to undermine racial labelling and stereotyping by whites.
* There is no parallel with the hostility towards white people, because it’s everywhere. You could include it in a list of names for hatred of various races, but it’s not the same as the others. Nowadays, hatred of blacks, Jews, etc. is anomalous and fragmented into isolated cases, and it makes news whenever it’s seen to occur. But dislike of whites is a fish-and-water thing. People have become so immersed in it that they no longer see it – in the media, politics, the education system, the entertainment industry, advertising, etc.
* Racism covers a wide spectrum of attitudes when applied to whites. I tried making a list describing white racism from its most virulent, KKK-level form, to the type of racism found in deans of Ivy-league universities.
LEVEL 1. Having an irrational hatred of blacks, a desire to do them harm, pleasure in using racial slurs. (Birmingham church bombers.)
LEVEL 2. Having rational concerns about black criminality and dysfunction, reflected in a conscious effort to insulate oneself from them. Race realism rather than race hatred. This type of person is genuinely pleased to see blacks do well. (Jared Taylor type.)
LEVEL 3. Similar to #2, but the concern about black criminality and dysfunction is never acknowledged and all precautionary measures are rationalized–i.e., “good” schools, not “white” schools. Focuses blame on other whites for black problems. (Typical DWL.)
LEVEL 4. Positive views of blacks, no efforts to self-segregate, do-gooder attitude, but may occasionally commit a microaggression by being insufficiently up on the latest protocols. (Typical Millennial.)
LEVEL 5. Being a white person, no matter how cravenly, you prostrate yourself before black demands. (College professor, politician.)
Posted inRace|Comments Off on Q. Does Race Exist? A. It’s Good Enough for Government Work.
David Brosia: Just when I thought you had reached your plateau Luke you post another dose of greatness.
* I can’t remember the last time a Jewish friend used the term “metaphysics.” Might be more than five years. They don’t use “ontological” much either. I guess they’re too carnal.
Chaim Amalek: Big words r 4 fags.
* Do you think about God when you are having sex? Why not? If you are fulfilling a mitzva, it is a holy act.
Danny Klopovic When I’m having sex, I think of Luke Ford.
Susan: Me too
Christine: Me three…
Miriam: I’m glad other people do too, I was about to get help thinking I’m the only one.
* Should American politicians and other American leaders mute their Christianity to make Jews more comfortable?
* Many if not most of my Jewish friends have no particular belief in God. It just doesn’t matter to them. If there is a God, He will make sure there is ultimate justice. If there is not a God, we have to do what we can to make things good for Jews.
Darren: We are more concerned about whether there is enough meat in the cholent.
Luke Ford God is in the chulent.
Darren: Is he in pork?
Luke Ford: If you are doing it right.
Darren: It’s always about technique!
Daniel Antinora Seems like a metaphysically indefensible position
David Kahane might need a re-think on that one, guys.
* Tell me about the miracles God is working in your life.
Chaim Amalek God has revealed to me the special role that Ted Cruz has been anointed to play in our national Passion.
* Can you make a good living selling crack to elementary school kids? Asking for a friend.
Darren: Only if they have Apple Pay on their iPads.
* The best women are the kind who Muslims and Africans want to rape.
Chaim Amalek: This will be the opening line of my next personal ad on Craigslist.
* After a severe flu, it’s not unusual to lack joy for weeks after. The vulnerability was shattering. Everything hurt. Almost no control. Best I could do for a few days was retweet.
* If our yeshivas simply taught this type of fitness, we wouldn’t have a shidduch crisis.
Chaim Amalek: The existence of such women is the fundamental driver of racism in the world.
Posted inPersonal|Comments Off on Reaching For Greatness
* NATO is probably staffed by some guys who have pretty conservative instincts, but they are somehow under the delusion that they’re actually defending the West.
I’ve talked to a lot of conservative foreign policy types. Talk to them about immigration in isolation, and they’ll agree with the most draconian solutions. But a second later, they go back to convincing themselves that confronting Putin and Assad somehow has something to do with defending their country.
The military man today has a lot in common with the National Review cuck.
Posted inEurope|Comments Off on Why Won’t NATO Defend Europe From Illegal Immigrants?
"This guy knows all the gossip, the ins and outs, the lashon hara of the Orthodox world. He’s an [expert] in... all the inner workings of the Orthodox world." (Rabbi Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff)
