WP: Clinton, Sanders likely to tackle minority concerns in debate

Posted on February 11, 2016 by Luke Ford

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* I’ve always thought that lead was a serious problem, but I was surprised to read that the level of lead in Flint children’s blood is only on the order of 1/4 to 1/2 the average of all children in the United States in the 1960s and 1970s. So this is another case of a relatively minor problem becoming a cause celeb because it is affects blacks. And, of course, the individuals who chose to change the water supply source and to not introduce the anti-corrosion chemicals were black. Not to say that there were not many government agencies staffed by whites who failed in their back up monitoring roll. And of course, the chief whistleblower was a white professor at Virginia Tech.

* Darnell Earley, an African American, affirmative action hire, was responsible for the water supply switch decision.

* One Flint city councilman is an ex-con (murder), and one is a bankrupt. The black emergency manager, Darnell Early has stepped down from his position as emergency manager (!) of the Detroit Public School system to ‘splain to the US Congress why he and his 20% reduced Flint City workforce screwed up big time with their rush conversion job (no white consultants … too expensive!) on the Flint water supply.

… but always remember, the problem is de white folks’ fault.

* Maybe if Bernie and Hillary spend enough time focusing on the black voters that they imagine will make the difference in their campaigns, The Donald’s message to the remaining voters will get through – 76% of the people who voted in 2008 were white.

* I cancelled my subscription to the Scientific American when they began firing writers for understanding genetics and the effects of genetic inheritance on intelligence….SA has degenerated since then, apparently.

* I’m sure Bernie will complain about the inexcusably high number of African American men who are incarcerated. But how can we know whether that number is too high, too low, or just right? I suggest this test: the number of African American men in prisons is disproportionately high if black neighborhoods have lower crime rates than white neighborhoods. That would indicate that more white criminals than black criminals remain at large committing crimes. However, since black neighborhoods have higher crime rates than white neighborhoods, logic tells us that too few black men are incarcerated.

* It beats the hell out of Obama speaking in a faux ghetto accent and telling a audience of young blacks that he is really up on the Hip Hop scene and name dropping Lil Wayne. Lil Wayne being the idiot rapper most famous for the promotion of Robotripping, the drinking of DXM cough syrup combined with smoking really high THC content pot, known as “Loud”.

If you want to destroy your gastrointestinal system, liver and permanently lower your IQ by at least 10 points, Robotripping is a pretty good way to go.

Hell, robotripping may even make you famous, sure as hell did for Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown.

* Black Political Discussion On 2016 Presidential Race is Wider and Deeper Than in 2008 or 2012

Barack Obama was the Democrat candidate, and practically all you could hear was:

How black is this Obama dude anyway? Ain’t his mama white, his daddy African? What does that make him? Later on it became “How black are YOU if you don’t support Obama?”

Got demands or just thoughts on issues like housing, foreclosures, low wages, no wages, black unemployment, mass incarceration or whatever? Swallow them. Siddown and shuddup before you scare white people out of voting for Obama. Keep quiet so he can get elected first.

Got a hunger and thirst for peace and justice? Grow up and lower those expectations. And remember he’s running for president of everybody, not just black people so keep that peace and justice stuff in your back pocket till after the elections, or after he gets settled in or maybe for his second term if he gets one.

He’s black so he obviously wants what you do, he just can’t say so out loud or he’ll scare the white folks. He’s can’t do nothin’ anyway if he don’t get elected.

* It’ll be total pandemonium as both candidates chase minority voters in the primaries going forward…and interesting to see if the eventual nominee can even match Obama’s fairly dismal share of the white vote in 2012. After all, we’re going to be treated to two elderly white people who are going to be far more explicit in their fealty to black political demands than Obama ever had to be. I can’t imagine that’s remotely appealing to about two thirds of the white electorate.

Posted in Blacks, Democrats | Comments Off on WP: Clinton, Sanders likely to tackle minority concerns in debate

Let’s Make America Great Again

Posted on February 11, 2016 by Luke Ford

Mencius Moldbug, founder of the Dark Enlightenment, writes in 2009:

Let’s say you… wanted to take America back to the past and establish a new order of hereditary nobility… First, we need to define noble status. Our rule is simple: if either of your parents was a noble, you’re a noble… And nobility remains a biological quality – a noble baby adopted by common parents is noble, a common baby adopted by noble parents is common…
The basic quality of a noble is that he or she is presumed to be better than commoners. Of course, both nobles and commoners are people. And people do vary. Individual circumstances must always be considered. However, the official presumption is that, in any conflict between a noble and a commoner, the noble is right and the commoner is wrong. Therefore, by default, the noble should win.
…Commoners and nobles will inevitably come into conflict. Our goal is to settle these conflicts, by default, in favor of the noble. For example, if a business must choose whether to hire one of two equally qualified applicants, and one is a noble while the other is a commoner, it should of course choose the noble. The same is true for… any other contest of merit. Our presumption is that while nobles are intrinsically, inherently and immeasurably superior to commoners, any mundane process for evaluating individuals will fail to detect these ethereal qualities – for which the outcome must therefore be adjusted.

Posted in Dark Enlightenment | Comments Off on Let’s Make America Great Again

Haaretz: Netanyahu: We’ll Surround Israel With Fences ‘To Defend Ourselves Against Wild Beasts’

Posted on February 11, 2016 by Luke Ford

I wish America was more like Israel in taking border protection seriously.

From Haaretz:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said during a tour to the construction site of a barrier on the eastern border on Tuesday that he wishes to surround the country with fences and barriers “to defend ourselves against wild beasts” that surround Israel.
“At the end, in the State of Israel, as I see it, there will be a fence that spans it all,” said Netanyahu. “I’ll be told, ‘this is what you want, to protect the villa?’ The answer is yes. Will we surround all of the State of Israel with fences and barriers? The answer is yes. In the area that we live in, we must defend ourselves against the wild beasts.”
Netanyahu added that the government is preparing a multi-year plan to surround all of Israel with security barriers, as well as a plan to close the breaches in the separation barrier between Israel and the West Bank.

Posted in Israel | Comments Off on Haaretz: Netanyahu: We’ll Surround Israel With Fences ‘To Defend Ourselves Against Wild Beasts’

Are Male Promiscuity And Female Chastity Compatible?

Posted on February 11, 2016 by Luke Ford

From the Chateau: The top 20% of women strongly prefer to be with the top 10% of men. The top 10% of men will spread their seed among the top 30% of women (and often more widely than that), only strongly preferring the top 10% of women when they are serious about commitment and settling down.

The hypergamy-polygyny nexus results in a shaky equilibrium where a small percentage of cads are having sex with a larger percentage of women. But these cads jump from woman to woman, or they keep multiple women as sexual outlets in a de facto harem, meeting up with each one on an irregular basis, (hence the common complaint among woman dating jerkboys that the jerks they love are never around).

What this means in practice is that one promiscuous man will date ten less promiscuous women, since each of his lovers is likely to be with only him and not sharing him with other men in a multiple concurrent sexual relationship arrangement. (Women are more averse than men are to fucking multiple lovers concurrently.)

Conclusion: yes, male promiscuity can coexist with female chastity. Or a reasonable 2016 facsimile of female chastity.

Posted in Dating | Comments Off on Are Male Promiscuity And Female Chastity Compatible?

‘A general intelligence factor in dogs’

Posted on February 11, 2016 by Luke Ford

Link: The structure of cognitive abilities in dogs is similar to that found in people.

– Dogs that solved problems more quickly were also more accurate.
– Dogs’ cognitive abilities can be tested quickly, like those of people.
– Bigger individual differences studies on dog cognition will contribute to cognitive epidemiology.

Abstract

Hundreds of studies have shown that, in people, cognitive abilities overlap yielding an underlying ‘g’ factor, which explains much of the variance. We assessed individual differences in cognitive abilities in 68 border collies to determine the structure of intelligence in dogs. We administered four configurations of a detour test and repeated trials of two choice tasks (point-following and quantity-discrimination). We used confirmatory factor analysis to test alternative models explaining test performance. The best-fitting model was a hierarchical model with three lower-order factors for the detour time, choice time, and choice score and a higher order factor; these accounted jointly for 68% of the variance in task scores. The higher order factor alone accounted for 17% of the variance. Dogs that quickly completed the detour tasks also tended to score highly on the choice tasks; this could be explained by a general intelligence factor. Learning about g in non human species is an essential component of developing a complete theory of g; this is feasible because testing cognitive abilities in other species does not depend on ecologically relevant tests. Discovering the place of g among fitness-bearing traits in other species will constitute a major advance in understanding the evolution of intelligence.

…Although we cannot calculate empirically the impact of range-restriction (of intelligence) on our results we surmise that our sample of farm dogs is somewhat analogous to a human university student population because farm dogs at the low tail of the intelligence distribution are more likely to be given away as companion animals.

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* We’re on our third dog, an Australian Shepherd, after owning a pair of beagles. The Aussie is supposed to be a very intelligent breed but our beagles were clever enough when they wanted to be. The biggest difference between the breeds we’ve noted is that the Aussie is very attuned to and eager to please her people and can be trusted with the run of the house when we’re home. Our beagles spent 15+ years penned into our kitchen/family room because they’d like as not pee on the carpet out of spite when you weren’t looking and sometimes even if you were. The Aussie is very observant and figured out that when I blow dry my hair (not a daily occurrence) I’m usually heading out without her and I’ll find her sitting in her crate when I reach the bottom of the stairs.

* I had a white dog who was dumb but could run like a grey hound, an aloof black dog who knew it all and dominated the white one. I had a brown one who was mid level intelligent but was all dog, she protected me, killed groundhogs in the fields and followed me everywhere. My latest version of dog is too smart for her own good.
The one thing I would say is intelligence in dogs might help them if they were alone on their own resources, scrabbling to survive while stealing a haunch of that dead deer from the wolfpack. But occasionally intelligence can be counterproductive for dogs due to the human factor in their environment . Got to keep the human happy…right? If you are a really smart dog and want your own way(like a lot of Border Collies), your stubbornness will be interpreted as bullheaded stupidity and its off to the pound for you. Generally there are more humans who reward slavish obedience than freedom of choice.

* Its always fascinated me that, if you discuss ‘breed’, people readily acknowledge that, amongst dogs, there is a wide variety in behavior and that it is innate to the breed not the species. OTOH if you then suggest that there are human ‘breeds’ with similar variation in behavior etc they will argue with you and, of course, claim that is racist.

Years ago, I was amazed when I took my city born and raised Irish Setter to the woods where he could run free. He had never been to the woods before but when he came upon some quail hidden in the brush he froze and assumed a ‘pointing’ stance to alert me that there was ‘game’ in the brush. You may not be able to ‘teach an old dog new tricks’ but it seems some breeds never forget the tricks their ancestors learned.

* Harpending and Cochran note in The 10,000 Year Explosion that Border Collies can master a task after five repetitions and repeat it accurately 95% of the time, in contrast to a poor Bassett Hound who requires over a hundred repetitions and rarely repeats the task correctly.

Kinda reminds me of Black Autumn students.

* I have read recently that research in dog intelligence is still growing. But it was practically nonexistent before 1990s. Everybody who had a dog knew how intelligent dogs were but scientists just kept talking about the instinct and were dismissive. Then in 1990s dog mania started among yuppies (why?) and there were countless stories and references about dogs in the New Yorker for instance. I remember then thinking that perhaps Jews overcame their prejudice against dogs and finally discovered white people’s joy of having a dog. Now I wonder whether this scientific interest in dogs and money that pay for the research stems from this Jewish neophytic fascination with dogs. In the future, if there is one, when muslims begin to have dogs it will be a sure sign they are assimilating into our culture. Dogs make as human.

* I’ve only seen one person deny that some breeds are smarter than others. It was when someone used the argument that races of people might vary in intelligence just as breeds of dogs do. The PC believer then denied that dog breeds varied in intelligence.

Curiouser and curiouser.

* That is because the dog breed analogy with human races is so perfectly apt and so perfectly self-evident that it has to be met with strident dismissal when anyone makes the obvious comparison.

Deep down, PC people know their beliefs are hollow nonsense, but their very beings are defined by those beliefs, so they will deny whatever it takes.

* Animals are pretty interesting in that they demonstrate how large an effect can result from a rather small difference in intelligence.

We have two cats that are sisters, so they can’t be that far apart in intelligence. Yet one is noticeably smarter than the other one, in ways that could potentially have real-world implications. For example, the smarter one has apparently figured out how doors work, although she can’t open one herself. If she wants to get through a door she starts trying to jump up and grab the knob to turn it. She can’t get enough of a grip to actually turn it, but she clearly understands the basic principle. If the knob had a more grippable design, she’d be able to open doors by herself. She demonstrates problem solving skills in other ways, but that’s the most striking example.

Like I said, this is a cat. They’re not smart to begin with, and if she’s smarter than her sister, it can’t be by much. But just that tiny amount would probably pay huge dividends in the wild.

* A more inclusive, diverse, and vibrant breed of dog would be Collies Without Borders.

* It has been argued (correctly, IMO) that a large, active brain is a very expensive piece of biological apparatus to feed and maintain. The animal has to have a significant return on survival (of the species, not the individual) to justify the investment.

Rabbits survive by procreation (r/K), their niche is to provide lunch for predators which they do quite well with the brain they have. Sharks are apex predators and would quickly eliminate their prey and competitors if any better at what they do – then experience a population collapse for lack of prey.

It remains to be seen, but my money is on a human population collapse. As an old cartoon said, “War is nature’s way!”

Posted in IQ, Pets | Comments Off on ‘A general intelligence factor in dogs’

You Don’t Know What Obama Said at the Mosque

Posted on February 11, 2016 by Luke Ford

Dennis Prager has done as much as any public intellectual in the mainstream to warn about the dangers of Islam to the West.

He writes this week: If you seek to understand Barack Obama and his views, the best place to go is his speeches. But you have to read them in their entirety, not rely on hearing them or on the media’s summary of them. When you do, you realize how often what Obama says is morally and intellectually confused and even untrue.

The most recent example was his speech last week at a mosque in Baltimore. In addition to reassuring Muslim Americans that they are as American as Americans of every other faith — – a point that any president, Republican or Democrat, would and should make – President Obama spoke a lot of nonsense, some of it dangerous.

President Obama: “So let’s start with this fact: For more than a thousand years, people have been drawn to Islam’s message of peace. And the very word itself, Islam, comes from salam — peace.”

Why did Obama say this? Even Muslim websites acknowledge that “Islam” means “submission” [to Allah], that it comes from the Arabic root “aslama” meaning submission, and that “Islam” is in the command form of that verb.

That’s why “Muslim” means “One who submits,” not “One who is peaceful.”

Obama: “Jefferson and John Adams had their own copies of the Quran.”

The reason Jefferson had a copy of the Quran was to try to understand it in light of what the Muslim ambassador from Tripoli had told him and John Adams. When asked why Tripoli pirates were attacking American ships and enslaving Americans, the Muslim ambassador explained that Muslims are commanded to do so by the Quran: “It was written in their Quran that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman [Muslim] who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to Paradise.”

That’s why Jefferson and Adams had Qurans.

Obama: “And how do we move forward together? … It can’t be just a burden on the Muslim community — although the Muslim community has to play a role.”

Most Americans would say that the American Muslim community has to play “the” role, not “a” role in preventing violent Islam from capturing the minds of American Muslims, and in helping authorities identify extremist Muslims.

Obama: “Second, as Americans, we have to stay true to our core values, and that includes freedom of religion for all faiths.”

This is so obviously true that one wonders why the president felt it necessary to mention it.

Obama: “There are Christians who are targeted now in the Middle East, despite having been there for centuries, and there are Jews who’ve lived in places like France for centuries who now feel obliged to leave because they feel themselves under assault – sometimes by Muslims.”

One would have expected that after mentioning “Christians targeted now in the Middle East,” he would have mentioned “Jews targeted now in the Middle East.” That, however, would presumably have been too controversial to say. So, the president mentioned the many Jews in France “who now feel obliged to leave” their country because “they feel themselves under assault” — and then came the corker: “sometimes by Muslims.”

Sometimes? French Jews have recently been murdered, tortured and harassed more than at any time since the Holocaust. And virtually every one of those attacks has been perpetrated by Muslims.

Obama: “We have to be consistent in condemning hateful rhetoric and violence against everyone. And that includes against Muslims here in the United States of America.”

Two facts are relevant here. One is that religious hate crimes are exceedingly rare in America. The other is that in 2014, the last year for which we have data, Jews were targets of hate crimes four times more frequently than Muslims.

Obama: “I often hear it said that we need moral clarity in this fight. And the suggestion is somehow that if I would simply say, these are all Islamic terrorists, then we would actually have solved the problem by now, apparently.”

The president has made extensive use of the straw man — a false target that he then attacks. This is one such example. No one has ever said that if the president were to identify Islamic terrorists by name instead of nameless “violent extremists,” “we would actually have solved the problem by now.”

What drives most Americans crazy is that the president of the United States refuses to name the enemy. And this rewriting of reality filters down. Increasingly, for example, when (and if) 9/11 is taught in American schools, the attackers are never identified as Muslims.

Obama: “And, by the way, the notion that America is at war with Islam ignores the fact that the world’s religions are a part of who we are.”

Another straw man. No American of any stature has said that “America is at war with Islam.”

Obama: “In the discussion I had before I came out, some people said, why is there always a burden on us? When a young man in Charleston shoots African-Americans in a church, there’s not an expectation that every white person in America suddenly is explaining that they’re not racist.”

This point alone should have been publicized by the media — that the president of the United States tells Muslims that they have no moral obligation to condemn violence committed in the name of Islam.

Obama: “American Muslims are better positioned than anybody to show that it is possible to be faithful to Islam … and to believe in democracy.”

That is actually true. Given that theocracy, not democracy, is a central tenet of Islam, if an Islam compatible with democracy ever develops, it will probably develop in America.

Obama: “These are the voices of Muslim scholars, some of whom join us today, who know Islam has a tradition of respect for other faiths.”

Another falsehood. Islam has no such tradition. Islam has always demanded that Jews and Christians be treated as humiliated second-class citizens — when not forced to choose between conversion or death.

Now you know what President Obama said at the Islamic Society of Baltimore. But if you just read or listened to the mainstream media, you would have missed it because none of this was reported. It was all about, as the headline in USA Today put it, “At Baltimore mosque, Obama condemns anti-Muslim bigotry.”

Posted in Islam | Comments Off on You Don’t Know What Obama Said at the Mosque

Review: In ‘My Father, the Pornographer,’ Chris Offutt Opens Up

Posted on February 11, 2016 by Luke Ford

Jennifer Senior writes: You have to wonder whether Andy Offutt’s furious, sadistic imagination also explains his sadism toward his children. Porn may not have been outlet enough. (He frequently told his son that were it not for pornography, he’d have been a serial killer.) More important, though, I think you have to wonder how it affected the adolescent sexuality of his children: What happens when your father is a furnace not just of smoldering rage, but of ferocious, shocking fantasies?

Mr. Offutt doesn’t seem to go in for “dime-story psychology,” as he calls it at one point. But we do get a clue. It’s the most tragic part of his memoir, and it arrives by stealth. At roughly the same moment he describes exploring the mysterious contents of his father’s office, he recalls his visits to the “fatman,” an overweight sad sack in town who sexually abused Chris when he was 15.

“Later, I decided that my parents would be proud of my open-mindedness in such a small town,” he writes. “I believed that what I was doing with the fatman made me similar to them. They wrote porn and had affairs. If they knew about the fatman, they would respect me, maybe even like me.”

It really hurts to read this.

Through it all, Mr. Offutt somehow manages to summon compassion for his father. That, ultimately, is what makes this memoir so unexpectedly moving. He admires his dad’s bravery for choosing a writing life. He wishes his dad didn’t have to become a hack, seeing real potential in his fecund, rambunctious imagination. And most of all, he pities his father’s loneliness, for being sentenced to a lifetime preoccupation with torture and a headful of savage sexual fantasies, predicated on the harming of innocents.

Posted in Pornography | Comments Off on Review: In ‘My Father, the Pornographer,’ Chris Offutt Opens Up

James Deen Turns 30

Posted on February 11, 2016 by Luke Ford

Jack* emails: Porn superstar James Deen turned 30 this week. That doesn’t exactly put him in Peyton Manning territory, but he’s gotta be contemplating what’s next. He failed at mainstream films, and is the target of sexual abuse allegations. His pathetic father can’t land him a job at JPL based on a few semesters at Pasadena City College. And I doubt he’ll be doing commercials for Papa John’s or Nationwide Insurance any time soon. He can’t even endorse condoms because he was so outspoken against their use in adult films. A sausage company perhaps? No, Jimmy Dean is already taken. What is poor Bryan Matthew (Baruch Menashe) Sevilla to do? I recommend he hook up with Chabad (maybe I should have used another verb), and go on celebrity speaking tours about how he returned to his faith.

Posted in Pornography | Comments Off on James Deen Turns 30

How Do I Reconcile My Affection For The Dark Enlightenment With Orthodox Judaism?

Posted on February 11, 2016 by Luke Ford

Dark Enlightenment tweets: “@lukeford good interview w @SOBL1 I applaud your honesty, how can you reconcile your conversion & Alt right views? You’re a goy to Haredi.”

I tweet back: “Easy. Ethno-Nationalism for everyone, including Jews. I want nothing for my group I don’t want for others.”

SOBL1 tweets: “I wholeheartedly agree. A people, a thede, has the best cohesion to make pro-civilization decisions and actions.”

Luke: “The Dark Enlightenment is anti-Jewish because of the choices [many] elite Jews have made. There is nothing inherent in Jews as such [to make them the inalterable enemy of gentile nationalisms, fascism and neo-reaction. Jews can be and often are great Americans, great Russians, great Englishmen, great Australians.] Many Italian Jews supported Mussolini, some German Orthodox rabbis initially supported Hitler. There are no permanent friends or enemies for nations or peoples, there are only shifting alliances. Right now Jews get along well with Christians and badly with Muslims. A few hundred years ago, the opposite was true. If Hitler had used Jews to build him nuclear weapons first and they proved decisive, Jews would have been essential to Nazi success and they would have taken an honored role in that society. In a hundred years, most Jews might live in China or Russian, and be regarded as good citizens. Jews, like all peoples, respond to incentives.

“Most Orthodox Jews, who are heavily urban, are virgins when they marry. What proud people would not want that? I can’t think of many systems more reactionary and anti-democratic and anti-equality than Orthodox Judaism.”

The best way of understanding the political right is that it is against equality.

I believe that ethno-nationalism as embodied by Israel and Japan is the best way to build a high-functioning society. The more cohesive a group, the more unified in race, religion and culture, the more strong.

According to Wikipedia: The Dark Enlightenment, or neoreactionary movement, or just neoreaction (abbreviated NRx by proponents), is an anti-democratic, reactionary movement that broadly rejects egalitarianism and Whig historiography. The movement favors a return to older societal constructs and forms of government, including support for monarchism and traditional gender roles, coupled with a libertarian or otherwise right-wing or conservative approach to economics.[1][2] Some critics have labeled the movement as “neo-fascist”.[3]

A 2013 TechCrunch article describes the “Neoreactionary” “community of bloggers” as a term applied to, and sometimes a self-description of, an informal group of online political theorists who have been active since the 2000s

Posted in Anti-Semitism, Dark Enlightenment, Orthodoxy | Comments Off on How Do I Reconcile My Affection For The Dark Enlightenment With Orthodox Judaism?

Do Whites Have A Future In The Democratic Party?

Posted on February 10, 2016 by Luke Ford

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* If I was a Democratic party bigwig, I’d be terrified of this stuff — how stuff you said 20 years ago in a completely different political environment could come back and haunt you for being insufficiently progressive by modern standards.

I wonder how all this must look to, say, politically ambitious kids of about high school age. I’ve always thought the hyper-ambitious Marco Rubio types that political parties depend on have their political views shaped at least partially by their own career self-interest — whichever ideology seems the most likely to deliver a person like themselves to the Oval Office is the one they naturally find the most persuasive.

Well, right now, there’s an entire generation of ambitious, charismatic young white kids who are constantly being pounded over the head with the message that they have no future in the Democratic Party. How could they? In addition to being hostile to white people in general, the party presents no plausible career path to anybody who’s not black, gay or transgender. Hillary Clinton checked the right boxes at every single stage of her entire career and she’s on the verge of being bamboozled — again — by yet another freak electoral phenomenon that nobody would have seen coming just two years ago. And here’s Genius T. Coates roasting her over coals for doing what, back in the 90s, was considered the smart move. If you’re a calculating Tracy Flick type, how do you plan for any of this?

Meanwhile, you look at the Republican race, and it’s full of folks that you just know were president of every club in high school. Even the wild card Trump presents a plausible model for an ambitious kid who has loads of charisma. What go-getter student government nerd looks at Bernie Sanders and says, “if I play my cards right, that could be me?”

* “Hillary Clinton checked the right boxes at every single stage of her entire career and she’s on the verge of being bamboozled — again — by yet another freak electoral phenomenon that nobody would have seen coming just two years ago.”

Referring to Hillary Clinton losing the nomination as a “freak electoral phenomenon” brings to mind Ben Stiller’s line from “Zoolander” about a “freak gasoline fight accident.”

* The left really lives in this bizarro-world-echo-chamber where mediocre black writers’ opinions on who should be president are worthy of national headlines.

I wish nothing but self-awareness upon on them. Because that will be worse than an atom bomb to their egos.

* Don’t forget that Hillary had more black support then Obama in 2007. They did not know what to make of the half-white guy with the funny name. Most blacks are low information voters who go by name recognition. They also tend to be brand loyal. For example, blacks stuck with Cadillac long after whites started shifting to foreign luxury cars.

It was only when Obama started winning primaries (thanks to white antiwar voters) that blacks started to take him seriously.

* Interesting to note that TNC was asked for his opinion on the Democratic primary, and the best he could come up with was that 20 years ago Hilary Clinton used a word that triggered him. This is not exactly what I would expect from someone who aspires to be “America’s most foremost public intellectual.”

It’s hard to conceive of the political-cultural climate becoming any more moronic.

* I have always wondered what it feels like to know that the only way you can win an election is due to the support of people from a different racial or ethnic group. I mean most people running for office would like to think that they are representative of their community or group. Most probably take it for granted that they will have the support of their community, and in national elections, their home state (Al Gore).

But in the case of Hillary, she was soundly rejected in New Hampshire by an overwhelming number of white gentiles while a Jewish man carried the day. However, her hopes now rest upon getting the black vote. If she had connected with other white, American gentiles, she’d have this in the bag. She still has a great chance of winning. But it will have to be done by appealing to a different demographic.

I just wonder what this feels like to be rejected by your own people and now be forced to depend upon others to get elected. That, in and of itself, is almost an indictment against the candidate who can’t even take their own demographic, isn’t it?

* Bernie should seek the Beyoncé endorsement, that really could put a nail in the coffin of the Hillary campaign. Normally someone as affluent as Beyoncé might not want to promote socialism, however Bernie could offer the “minority oppression tax exemption” from his 90% top tax rate on the rich. For pre-designated members of the coalition of the fringes, there top rate would max out at just 30%.

* Weaker black kids may be set upon by stronger black kids, and there may be some fear associated with this… but also pride.
After all, we do identify by race. So, even if black kids act like thugs, they be acting tough and strong. So, even if the Hissy Coates was sometimes pushed around by them, he also exulted in their black power.

If a white kid is bullied by blacks, he is totally defeated as both individual and whitey.
But if a black kid is bullied by blacks, he is defeated as an individual but may feel a bit of pride in that blacks are so tough.

We see such toady behavior among whites too. After all, plenty of toady whites hang around as sidekicks to bigger stronger whites. Even as they get pushed around, they feel flattered that they are part of the tough guy community.

Guys like Spike Flea and The Hissy Coates feel something strange in relation to blacks. They are smarter than most Negroes and creative or ‘intellectual’(if not exactly genius). And their interests don’t appeal to most Negroes who be into rap, sports, and thuggery. So, someone like Flea and Hissy would have been nowhere without white support since white Libs are more into art cinema and social ‘philosophy’. And on some level, Flea and Hissy must be grateful to whites. But they also feel like buppie sellouts who butter their bread by appealing to white bread.

So, they make a big fuss about how they be black, proud, and angry too.
But in fact, most blacks don’t care about what they’re into. And Flea and Hissy would be safer among whites and even white cops than among da brothaz and sistaz.
But this makes them feel like sellouts.

Also, even they fear black fury and rage, they are proud of it cuz it’s so badass. They wouldn’t want to live blacks thugs, but they is proud that black thugs are the alphas of American Culture.

Flea and Hissy are impressed by black thuggery and want to be associated with its badass power.
But then, they are also sensitive about blacks being thought of as ‘thugs’ cuz that be ‘racist’.

Blacks love Thug Pride but don’t want to be called thugs.

It’s like feminists now…love Slut Pride but don’t want to be called sluts.

And Jews love chutzpah pride (and take great joy in running circles around goyim) but don’t want to be seen as pushy Jews.

Posted in Blacks, Democrats | Comments Off on Do Whites Have A Future In The Democratic Party?