Elaine’s dog problem is solved by a rabbi in her apartment complex with a cable show. Elaine later confides in the rabbi about her insecurity about George getting engaged. The rabbi later tells several people, including Jerry, about Elaine’s insecurity towards George’s wedding.
Kramer’s involvement in the dognapping worries him. George decides he wants to postpone the engagement until March 21 (Spring Equinox). His first attempt to postpone the wedding leads to Susan becoming hysterical and bursting into tears. Later George gets the idea to be nonchalant about the whole thing after watching a man break up with his girlfriend at Monk’s. Intending to try a similar approach, he breaks down in tears and begs Susan to postpone the wedding; touched by his show of emotions, Susan agrees to postpone the wedding.
Kramer and Jerry go to see Plan 9 from Outer Space at the cinema. Kramer sneaks in gourmet coffee, spills it, and scalds himself; he says he has a case for a lawsuit (an obvious allusion to the well-known McDonald’s coffee case).
The episode ends with Susan and George watching the rabbi’s TV show and the rabbi recounting the story Elaine told him including a part about George (the rabbi references both Elaine and George by name) wanting to know if it was still cheating if he paid for a prostitute while engaged, resulting in the wedding’s postponement being revoked.
When you confide in a Christian clergyman, you can usually take confidentiality for granted. When you confide in a rabbi, you cannot. Judaism does not mandate rabbis to hold confidentiality.
Rabbi Michael Broyde
Rabbi Yona Reiss
Nathan Diament, Esq.
The “clergyman-penitent privilege” was first introduced in the United States in the State of New York in the early 1800s. Since that time, it has been codified in New York as well as all fifty states and the District of Columbia in various forms which have, in turn, been updated and revised over the years.[1] The most notable revision was the expansion of this privilege from its original application to Catholic priests and their confessors to the clerics of other religions and theirs.[2] Perhaps due to the fact that these statutes grew from the Catholic model, the presumption underlying them is that a clergyman will be directed by his religion not to disclose any information confided in him by a penitent. While, as outlined in the halakhic discussion below, this default position coincides with that of halakha, it does not account for the situations in which halakha calls upon a Rabbi to disclose confided information.
In assessing the various clergy-penitent privilege statutes, there are three basic questions relevant to the practice of a Rabbi:[3]
(1) Who holds the privilege?
(2) What communications are covered by the privilege?
(3) How is the privilege waived?
(1) The holder of a privilege has the power to invoke it or waive it. With regard to the famous attorney-client privilege, for example, it is the client that holds the privilege and thus, it is only the client who can permit the attorney to divulge information revealed to him in their confidential conversations. Among the fifty states, statutes may be found to resort to one of three models as to who holds the clergy-penitent privilege. In the majority of states, including New York, the privilege is held by the “penitent.” [4] In some states, such as Illinois, it is the clergyman who holds the privilege and is thus empowered to waive it.[5] Finally, in some states, such as New Jersey, the privilege is held by both the clergyman and the penitent and both must waive it for disclosure to be permitted.[6]
(2) Although states vary with regard to who holds and may waive the privilege, there is general consensus with regard to what type of communication falls within the scope of the privilege. Not surprisingly, not everything said by a person to a Rabbi is protected by this privilege; rather, the communications must be made to the clergyman, in the words of New York’s statute, “in his professional character as spiritual adviser.” Thus, New York’s highest court ruled over a decade ago, that a Rabbi had not breached the confidentiality statute in revealing an accused murderer’s communications to him when the only purposes for which the accused contacted the Rabbi were for his help in finding him a lawyer and negotiating with the prosecutor’s office. [7] This is not to say, however, that it is only matters that are “religious” which are privileged. Secular matters that arise in the context of a conversation with a Rabbi in which the Rabbi has been approached to provide spiritual guidance and counseling will be included under the privilege’s umbrella. In some states, it has been held that the privilege only bars the clergyman from disclosing communications from the penitent, but that the clergyman may relate his “observations.”
(3) Like other privileges, the clergy-penitent privilege is statutorily constructed to prevent a clergyman from being compelled to testify in a legal proceeding about the matters confided in him by the penitent. If the privilege is found not to have “attached” in the first place, or is explicitly waived, the Rabbi may then disclose the confidential communication. As mentioned above, the privilege will not arise when the communication was not made to the Rabbi in the context of his professional capacity for the purpose of spiritual guidance. Also, like other privileges, this privilege will not attach when the circumstances of the communication are not entirely confidential in the first place; for example, if a third person who is not a member of the clergy is in the room. [8] Under current law, in states such as New York where the penitent holds a properly created privilege, that person must explicitly waive it to permit the Rabbi to disclose the confidential communication. In states such as Illinois, where the clergyman holds the privilege, it falls to the clergyman to waive it. In states where both hold it, generally, both must waive. It is, however, important to note the newly amended provision of New Jersey’s law which may be adopted up by other states in the future. As mentioned above, New Jersey bestows the privilege upon both the clergyman and the penitent and thus, in general, both must waive it. The law now provides that when “the privileged communication pertains to a future criminal act…the cleric alone may, but is not required to, waive the privilege.”
Two points are important to note in concluding this brief discussion. First, rabbis may be aware that the federal and state constitutions protect the “free exercise of religion.” Thus, one might be led to assume that such a constitutional protection will protect the Rabbi in a case where he discloses otherwise confidential information when he does so pursuant to a religious imperative. While one would hope this position would be clearly and widely recognized, it is not as of yet. [9] Moreover, there are precedents in American law which could very well suggest that a secular judge might not recognize a free exercise exception to these statutes. [10] This, as well as the entire foregoing outline, leads to the second point: rabbis would be well advised to consult with their personal attorneys [11] in dealing with any situation in which the issues of confidentiality and privilege arise.
Posted inRabbis|Comments Off on Seinfeld: The Postponement
An Orthodox friend told me the other day: “The type of nativism and nationalism Donald Trump is stirring up is dangerous for Jews. We might not be safe here in five years. I’m preparing to move to Israel.”
Luke: “We Jews have the Jewish state, why shouldn’t gentiles have their own states.”
Friend: “Of course.”
Luke: “When you say that as gentiles become more nationalistic, they become more anti-Jewish, are you saying that Jews are not in the interests of gentile nationalisms?”
Friend: “Of course. Do you think Israel would be better off with a dramatic increase in its Filipino population? My ancestors fought and bled to establish Israel. I don’t want to give up my land to foreigners.”
Luke: “So you’re saying Israel would be better off without its Arab citizens?”
Friend: “Of course. No state is better off with the presence of minorities who resent it.”
Luke: “No dominantly Protestant state has slaughtered Jews. WASPs don’t slaughter Jews. WASPs look at people as individuals, not as members of groups.”
Friend: “I don’t trust that.”
Posted inNationalism|Comments Off on Gentile Nationalisms Are Dangerous For Jews
After a 30-second scuffle on a train, it took 20 months and £15,000 to clear my name
For 20 months, I stood accused of a hate crime: homophobically motivated common assault. The British Transport Police pursued my case with extraordinary zeal. So too did the Crown Prosecution Service. I was plunged into a world where common sense withered and died.
The nightmare began when I was travelling home to London after a funeral in Kent. I was chatting with a friend on the train when a strange man started shouting at us from across the carriage. ‘Shut up!’ he yelled before accusing us of conducting a sexist and misogynistic conversation at high volume. This was, in his opinion, ‘offensive’.
We were bemused. Talking at a normal volume for a private conversation, we were in fact discussing a male colleague, admittedly using the occasional swear word. Jabbing his finger at us, our accuser insisted we were using derogatory language about a woman. We weren’t. I suggested that he might like to stop his tirade. But he carried on screaming at us. When he went to get up, I decided to defend myself by trying to keep him in his seat. I thought it would be safer that way. My friend was 66 and not well. At this point our accuser leapt to his feet and punched me in the face. A playground grappling session ensued. I’m no fighter and nor was he. It was a non-event, handbags. No one was hurt.
Someone had dialled 999, the guard arrived and I returned to my seat. The entire altercation lasted about 30 seconds. The train halted at Tunbridge Wells, a police officer took our statements separately and informed me that my accuser didn’t want to press charges. Nor did I. He got off the train, I continued my journey and that was the end of it. Or so I thought.
A day later a British Transport Police officer rang my adversary — who turned out to be a university lecturer. For reasons I will never know, this call led to a change of heart by my accuser. The BTP subsequently interviewed me, and before I knew what had happened I was being accused of homophobic abuse and assault. I was stunned. I had allegedly interrupted the man’s attempts to make a phone call by asking him if he was ringing his gay lover.
This allegation could have ruined my life. Had I been found guilty, as a television critic and pundit who appears on the box and the radio regularly, my career would have been over.
The man had no evidence to support his claim. On my side, I had several witnesses who had heard nothing of the sort, plus CCTV footage that showed our altercation had been no more than an insignificant skirmish. Still, the police investigated my case with ardour. The investigating officers’ florid report to the CPS made it sound as if I’d beaten the hell out of the guy. It was nonsense. Nevertheless, charges were duly pressed.
COMMENTS:
* This guy was conducting a loud, offensive conversation with his equally loutish friend, then was asked to keep his voice down, then proceeded to threaten, insult, and assault a member of the public.
* I know very well that the zealous little British Transport coppers who tried to ruin my life did so because the successful prosecution of hate crimes gets them promoted. So sorry it didn’t work out for them. And really hope they enjoyed reading my article in The Spectator.
* Recently, here in NYC, a story occurred whereby a white mma fighter obliterated two muslim teens in front of their mosque. The media erupted with “hate crime” paranoia, parroting the mosques’ fabricated story of how the wonderfully innocent teens were carrying canned goods to the local orphanage and offered to help a stranded woman in her car before being set on by this beast shouting anti-islamic epithets.
Turns out these teens had fondled the woman, insulted her in her car, tried to reach in through the window to harass her. The boyfriend had come out and beat the ever-loving snot out of them. Justice served. But I worry about that man’s life now, being pursued by the lawyers of these rats.
* Alison Saunders, a lesbian and Common Purpose graduate, is at the heart of this war against free speech, conservatism and maleness. The facts and the events described in this piece are unlikely to be entirely unconnected.
* As a person with some experience in conflicts, I recommend: 1- Never touch anyone, even less if the person is not known to you. 2- Never engage in a personal discussion in public with an unknown. Ignore him and go away. 3- If possible, when being addressed by an unknown person, film the interview.
* The process is a large part of the punishment.
This was made clear by my own “hate speech” stalker on these forums, robbersdog, who claimed he would get me prosecuted for alleged “antisemitic hate speech”, and his special identity lobby contacts gave him the opportunity to meet directly with an Assistant Chief Constable, no less, to try to persuade him how much I deserved to be prosecuted for my opinions.
He openly gloated about supposed other victims of his snitching, and how much suffering he hoped would be caused by the mere process of the police arresting me, searching my house and confiscating my computers, long before any actual conviction.
* And whilst we’re on the subject of deletions…I’m going for the big one, ie, the ultimate solution to the Randal problem. I’ve already been in touch with one of Disqus’ two founders in San Francisco, and I’ll be furnishing him with details of the police investigation into your hate-speech. He’s got a Jewish wife and many of his investors (who will be contacted if necessary) are Jewish too. Those Jews eh?
Remember when you told me to “bring it on”? Well…you didn’t expect me to ignore that challenge did you? When an antisemite like you throws down the gauntlet with such misplaced, hubristic machismo, I’m only too happy to oblige. So it’s both odd and ironic that you spend so much time whinging to other people about all of this, because I’m only doing what you asked me to do.
* I have to admire the irony of your position here — essentially you are threatening an (alleged) antisemite with an international Jewish conspiracy against him, no?
Unless this is intended to be some rarified form of comedy that I have misunderstood, one might tentatively suggest that perhaps attempting to confirm the batty conspiracy theories of antisemites everywhere is not a good way to combat antisemitism…
Posted inCensorship|Comments Off on Kevin O’Sullivan: ‘What happened when I was charged with a hate crime’
The only thing that the Coalition of the Fringe has in common is hatred of white people.
From Mic.com: “Carly Pildis is a Political Organizer who has spent her career fighting for social/economic justice and equality. She has worked on a variety of issue campaigns and recently finished work on the Obama campaign. When she isn’t working, she enjoys wandering her neighborhood farmer’s market, watching Boston based sports teams, and being active in her synagogue. All opinions are my own and do not reflect on any employer past or present.”
I AM WOKE: WHY I AM FINALLY RAISING MY VOICE AGAINST JEWISH ERASURE IN THE ANTI-RACISM MOVEMENT
Should the values of anti-oppression apply to Jews?
By Carly Pildis
I am blessed to live in an incredibly happy home. A home where we fry latkes, make jollof rice, and spend a lot of time laughing. I have a multi-racial Jewish family. I am an Ashkenazi Jew. My husband is a Ghanaian American Jew.
I revere those who created a world where we can live in relative peace and stability. We are claiming Loving v. Virginia Day a family holiday. We are still debating how to celebrate, but the past two years I’ve made pancakes. It’s the kind of simple, family pleasure we are so grateful to enjoy, and thankful that past generations fought for.
I am well aware that the movement for equality is not over, and I try to be an active participant. I have witnessed my husband being racially profiled, and it was deeply frightening for us both. I have realized that while we live in the same home, we also live in different countries that have different requirements of our behavior. White privilege meant that trespassing in a park, smoking marijuana, and sneaking into a private swimming pool were youthful indiscretions, good memories of the freer days of my youth. They were potential death traps for my husband. Sharing a home with a black man teaches you more about your white privilege than any book could. It teaches you all the time.
I am a part of the anti-oppression movement and the anti-racism movement. Although we are not always welcomed there as Jews, I do believe that teaching people to recognize racism and other forms of oppression and actively fight them in our daily lives is lifesaving work. I believe we are seeing a wave of hatred and violence against people of color and against Jews like we have not seen in my lifetime. I have always fought anti-Semitism with one group, my fellow Jews, and then stood against the oppression of every other group in the world with the anti-racism crowd. But the schism is starting to wear me out. The hopping back-and-forth on one foot is exhausting.
Posted inJews|Comments Off on Tabletmag: ‘Sharing a home with a black man teaches you more about your white privilege than any book could’
Comments: Paul Ryan has a degree in nothing from the university of nowhere (economics/Miami University in Ohio). He has little or no personal history applicable to his career. Occupationally, Ryan is a life-long politician with no experience in the real world.
Mitch McConnell also has a degree in nothing from the university of nowhere (history/U. Louisville Ky). Similarly he has little or no personal history and has no experience occupationally except only as a crooked politician.
If either of these guys was applying for a job at Autozone or Walmart they’d likely be rejected for having no verifiable recent work history, no experience and no applicable job skills.
* How about segregating whites from the rest? Make whites live in their own communities, attend their own schools, work in their own businesses, etc.
* The Rahimi’s and their 8 children were just what America needed. Who would bring fried chicken to the ghettos of the Northeast if not for them? Who would shoplift from Filene’s if not for his daughters (the Tsarnaevs women also had arrests for shoplifting, etc.) ? Who would stiff Macy’s for $46,000 if not for them? Who would cheat on their taxes and claim to make only $1,400/month while owning a restaurant if not for them? Who would serve as a baby daddy and not pay child support if not for them? If Mama Rahimi was not arrested for child abuse, how could we maintain full employment in the prison/social work industry?
Long before Ahmad starting leaving pressure cooker bombs around the NY metro area, it was clear that once again America was enriched by the Rahimi clan and their authentic Afghan style fried chicken.
Posted inAmerica|Comments Off on Do We Need Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell?
Many Orthodox Jews I meet went to public school but almost no Orthodox Jews I know sends their kids to public schools today because the schools are riddled with drugs and depravity.
You can’t take your kid to the park on Airdrome and Robertson anymore in 90035 because you will likely encounter black and Mexican four-year old kids hurling f-bombs and beating on each other.
Today’s goyim are nothing like the well-behaved goyim of 1950s America, so Jews have to spend more money and effort to shelter their children. America’s going to hell. It’s filthy out there.
I moved to California from Australia in 1977. It was a nice place. Now it’s largely an extension of Mexico.
Posted inAmerica|Comments Off on Today’s American Goyim Are Nothing Like 1950s American Goyim
GotNews: Facebook’s recently launched voter registration drive is run by a far left anti-Trumper, who also runs Facebook’s privacy program.
Daniel Crowley, whose anti-Trump Facebook posts are shown below, apparently launched Facebook’s voter registration drive, and also runs Facebook’s privacy program.
He previously ran Google’s privacy program, according to his LinkedIn profile.
We thought we were done with Facebook’s left-wing bias when The Daily Caller credited us with shutting down their biased trending news team, but apparently there’s still work to be done.
Posted inFacebook|Comments Off on Facebook Voter Registration Drive Run By Far Left Anti-Trumper, Who Also Runs Facebook’s Privacy Program
John Derbyshire writes: A subset of American Jews—a subset, a minority—suffer from a kind of psychological deformation that keeps them trapped in a particular, strangely atavistic type of paranoia, of victim mentality.
One side effect of this mentality: an unblinking vigilance, a hyper-sensitivity, towards the slightest tendency of the Gentile majority to drift Cossack-wards. This easily and often slops over into—and I am speaking of a subset of a subset of American Jews—into a generalized dislike, a prejudice, against white Christians.
Another side effect: the feeling that, for an oppressed minority—we’re still in 1881, remember: it’s always 1881—for an oppressed minority there is safety in courting and joining with other outsider groups for solidarity against the dangerous, dominant Goyim. The great dream of this mentality, in fact, is to get enough of a coalition of outsiders together to outnumber the Goyim, the white Christians. That’s why so many Jews are so passionately committed to mass Third World immigration.
It’s not hard to find evidence of this. Example: one of the “Intelligence Squared” debate series that took place September 13th. The motion to be debated was “Blame the Elites for the Trump Phenomenon.” It lasts an hour and 44 minutes.[Transcript PDF]
All four debaters were Bigfoot American journalists. Both sides of the debate were anti-Trump; the debate was over whose fault it was that Trump had gotten the GOP nomination. For the motion, arguing that it was the fault of the elites, were Ben Domenech [Email him] and Timothy Carney, [Email him] both Gentiles. Against the motion, arguing that it was not the fault of the elites, were Jennifer Rubin [email her] and Bret Stephens [Email him] both Jewish.
That tells you something by itself. That atavistic style of Jewish paranoia that I spoke about, when it hears the word “elites,” at once flies to the thought: They’re talking about US!… and the hoofbeats of the Cossacks are heard drumming in the distance.
At some mental level Rubin and Stephens read the title of the debate as: “Blame the Jews for the Trump Phenomenon.” That’s why they’re arguing against the motion. No, no, it’s not our fault—it’s those damn peasants!
ORDER IT NOW
This put them on edge. You can see it in the debate. Stephens actually plays the Holocaust Card at 1h22m, brandishing the print-out of an anti-Semitic tweet he got. Earlier, at 56m, the whole debate had almost veered into a straightforward Christians versus Jews joust. Dealing with Mrs. Clinton’s use of the word “irredeemable,” Jay Carney and Jennifer Rubin clashed lances thus:
Clip: (Carney) I disagree with Bret Stephens and with Hillary Clinton that a quarter of the population is unredeemable. And my bias, on the table, is, I’m a Christian and I think everyone is redeemable …
(Rubin) We Jews just believe in good and evil. We don’t think everyone isredeemable.
It’s been a while since I saw the atavistic paranoia of Jews, that subset of them, so starkly presented. The last time was, in fact, when I saw that Sacha Baron Cohen movie Borat, where it’s likewise hard to miss.
If I’m right about Rubin and Stephens, the result of the debate did nothing to soothe their paranoia. Part of the format for these Intelligence Squared debates is that the studio audience is polled at the beginning—how many for, how many against, how many undecided. The debate takes place, then at the end the audience is polled again, to see how many of the undecideds were persuaded which way.
Result: The audience percentage favoring the motion, that our elites were to blame for the rise of Trump, shot up 26 percent, from 32 to 58. The percentage blaming the peasants went up only six percent, 27 to 33.
Uh-oh, here come the Cossacks.
I’ll just add here that if you take exception to all that coming from me, a Gentile, perhaps you’ll take from Caroline Glick, a Jew. (I know I’m not allowed to say “Jewess” because I checked once with a Jewish lady editor I was working for. Quote from her: “We can say it, but you can’t.”)
Ms. Glick covers that same debate from the point of view of an ethnocentric Jew, and her coverage comes out sounding a lot like mine. She points up the rather high level of open anti-Semitism on the political Left. Then—
The problem on the Republican side of the aisle … is not that the party has turned against the Jews. The problem is that a large contingent of prominent Jewish Republicans has decided to commit political suicide …
Rather than … accept the will of their fellow Republicans, this year the most prominent members of the Jewish Republican elite have opted to attack Trump and his voters.
That is, they have decided to commit political suicide. Twilight of American Jewry, Jerusalem Post, September 15, 2016
That’s you she’s talking about, Jennifer Rubin and Bret Stephens.
As I said, both sides in that Intelligence Squared debate were anti-Trump. Whether all four were actually NeverTrumpers was not clear. You can be anti-Trump without being NeverTrump, on the lesser of two evils principle.
But at least one of the Jewish side was a NeverTrumper, though. How do we know this? These are opinion journalists, recall. He wrote about it.
September 12th, the day before the debate, Stephens posted a Q&A column in the opinion pages of the Wall Street Journal, where he is a Deputy Editor and opinion columnist. Both the Qs and the As were apparently written by Stephens himself, a common format in opinion journalism. I’ve done columns in that format myself.
Subtitle: “The nominee has more in common with Kanye West than with Steve Wynn.”
That subtitle threw me. Kanye West I know about at a very vague level. He’s one of those famous-for-being-famous people, right? I couldn’t tell you a single darn thing he’s done, but I see his name on the scandal sheets when I’m in the supermarket checkout line.
Who’s Steve Wynn, though? I had to look him up. He’s a billionaire property developer, very much like Trump. He’s built luxury hotels and casinos.
So what’s he doing in that subtitle? Well, he seems a bit more Upper West Side than Trump. He’s a connoisseur of fine art, for example. I don’t see much otherwise to place him at one end of an acceptability spectrum that has Donald Trump and Kanye West at the other end.
Or do I? Checking a bit further, I see that Steve Wynn, like Bret Stephens, is an American-born Ashkenazi Jew, original name Weinberg. So on that acceptability spectrum, we have two Jews at one end and two Gentiles at the other—just like in the following day’s debate!
Kanye West is a Gentile; I checked. In fact, a couple of years ago he got himself in a spot of bother by telling a New York radio station that “Black people don’t have the same level of connections as Jewish people.”.[Kanye West wants to take back ‘ignorant compliment’ about Jews , Jerusalem Post, December 22, 2013]I wouldn’t be terrifically surprised to learn that it was exactly that remark that lodged itself in Bret Stephens’ mind, causing him to pair off West with Trump at the dark end of the spectrum.
OK, getting past the subtitle, what’s in the column? Well, you can read it for yourself. No, you don’t need a Wall Street Journal subscription—who can afford those things? What you do is, put the title, “NeverTrump for Dummies,” into the search box at Google News. I’ll just pull out one single quote.
ORDER IT NOW
First thing I did was Ctrl-F on the word “nativist.” Yep, there it is. I knew it would be: “Mr. Trump’s nativist brand of politics is much further removed from conservatism than Mrs. Clinton’s mainstream liberalism,” end quote.
There you see the paranoia, the immigration fanaticism. For a politician to be “nativist”—to favor the natives, the people born in his country, over foreigners—is worse, much worse, than Clintonian liberalism, says Bret Stephens.
For him, to be “nativist” is worse than anything, because if a “nativist” gets power, our Coalition of Others will never have numbers to swamp the Goyim. They’ll be dominant for ever, and sooner or later they’ll turn on the Jews! [Hoofbeat sounds].
I know, it sounds nutty. Possibly I am being paranoid. But watching that debate, and then reading Bret Stephens’ print piece, it does seem to me that Bret Stephens’ paranoia, that atavistic fear, is in plain sight, just under the surface.
What, after all, is wrong with nativism? Why is this a pejorative—even on the political Left, never mind from the pen of a self-described conservative.
For a government to favor its own people over foreigners: There’s something wrong with that? What? What, exactly?
Because it’s “hateful”? What nonsense! I favor my own kids over your kids, by a mile and a half; but I don’t hate your kids, so long as they don’t come into my house uninvited. Good luck to them.
* Derb is a nice fellow but he is incapable of writing boldly and honestly about any issue that involves Jews as wrongdoers. Thus, even when he ventures into this taboo-laden area, he squanders half his time back-peddling and apologizing. Is he running for public office?
Derb understands the problem. All too well. But he lacks courage. Derb’s terrified of being labeled an ‘anti-Semite’. Silly boy. But this anxiety disorder affects his judgement.
Unfortunately, America is full of public figures with this affliction. Their cravenness is part of the problem.
The result? Derb is unable to be penetrating, straightforward and boldly critical about you-know-who and you-know-what.
On this topic, he’s a hopeless wimp.
Sorry, Derb, but boldness and honesty are what’s urgently needed right now. Yet you keep failing to deliver. This weak article proves it.
I recommend that you read more essays by Kevin MacDonald, Gilad Aztmon, or Philip Giraldi.
In the meantime, stick to writing about illegal immigration.
And pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!
* Saying there’s no anti-semitism in your archives is like a Good Progressive saying he’s never written anything politically incorrect. Even if it’s true that doesn’t mean it’ll be true tomorrow. Because there’s no hard definition of an anti-semite. Certainly it doesn’t mean someone who objectively hates Jews. It has come to mean anyone Jews, or those speaking for Jews, don’t like. Jews could start disliking you any day, if they don’t already.
Once that happens, anything in your archive is anti-semitic by definition.
* Why are you talking about Cossacks and 1881 when it would be more to the point to mention Nazis and 1933-1945. That’s where their minds are trapped. Same way for neocons it’s always 1938 or ’39 and we’re Great Britain.
But I suppose it’s a good thing that not every single page on the internet is about Nazis.
* Assuming that theory is true, maybe the goyim wouldn’t turn on the Jews if the Jews didn’t constantly agitate to flood the nation with foreigners and come up with retarded new ways to demonize the domestic population.
That aside, I’m not sure left wing Jews really believe it’s 1881 Russia, or that their Judaic values compel them to be liberals. It’s more likely the other way around. They use their past victimhood as a fearmongering tactic, and their religion as moral support for their political views. Deep down, they are first and foremost true believers, worshiping at the altar of Egalitarianism.
* That’s as anti-semitic as most of the more thoughtful on the alt-right are, Derbyshire. Even /Goebbels/ knew that ‘not all Jews are like that’ – apparently he had a Jewish history teacher who he loved. Your understanding has structure, while that of many lazier-thinking alt-righters does not.
I wonder whether it’s connected to the phenomenon of people never really getting over a defeat – rejection in love, the American South forever mumbling old bones, Mexicans still smarting from the loss of their territory to America. Perhaps the difference in degree is due to Jews’ higher smarts and thus potency in this world, perhaps due to a higher-than-average sense of /their people/. Christ, I’ve heard NPR’s Ira Glass talk about ‘his people’.
* The best way forward for a small, well-connected minority is to align with the dominant ethnic group and go forth from there. This is actually the best way forward for the Jews, and why they don’t simply do this is something I don’t understand. Any Jew who doesn’t want to do this is free to move to Israel – surely the said Jew also wouldn’t want the Palestinian Arabs to out number the Israeli Jews?
The Jews are fighting an unending war to prevent 1933 from ever happening again, never mind that they’ve successfully associated Judaism with (Catholic, and European Protestant) Christianity, that Islam is arguably the most “anti-Semitic” religion out there, that they’d paint themselves into a corner by not looking like the dominant goyim.
This is like setting fire to an oil rig – and its lifeboats – in the North Sea.
* I do not see anything uniquely or especially Jewish about either the far-left anti-white people or elitist anti-Trump Republicans, or all that much similar to each other.
There is certainly a Jewish flavor of white ethnomasochism, and it is as greatly distasteful as the English, Swedish or Popish varieties.
Regarding the global elite, it seems much more at its base Anglo-Saxon and more broadly Western European, and the Jews in it tend to be miscegenated (mostly with NW Europeans, increasingly with NE Asians) and ultra-assimilated. Bret Stephens wasn’t engaging in intensive Torah study at Middlesex boarding school, the University of Chicago, and the London School of Economics.
* Growing up in a Jewish family, I was conditioned to think about pogroms and the Holocaust, whenever the issue of immigration came up. However, I was cured of this neurosis by being exposed to extreme diversity (i.e. getting the feeling that your hometown and school district are no longer part of America). Stephen Miller, a Jewish aide to Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump, seems to have had a similar “conversion” experience when he was growing up in Southern California.
* I love that notion that a panel of two Jews, two Christians, all four Lille-White, privileged, connected, “educated”, sit around and bat about the percentage of Trump voters that are irredeemable and deplorable and racist. They name the group, White, working class, lower-caste Trump supporters. Then, they assign varying levels of racism to us? And the Jewish debaters of course, in THEIR racism, assign higher levels of racism to the Trump Goyim than the Christian debaters and of course, the Jews consider US irredeemable more than the Gentile elites at the panel debate.
These are the elites that set the illegals on the rest of us, empower Blacks to their violence (not a word for THEIR racism and violence, of course) and live in their gated communities traveling on armed security details and limousines. This panel, they’re the same coin, different side, both sides elite, except the Jews have more money, no doubt. Being a Multi-Culti Deplorable however, I will happily observe if not assist, the anarchy that goes looking for these elites. When the balloon goes up, when the gated communities are swamped and the mobs are looking for these people to repay the anarchy these elites themselves create, the mobs will not discriminate, they will cut ALL the elite throats. Mustn’t be anti-Semite! In that scenario, ALL the elites die.
* Its funny that people like Rubin and Stephens are all multiculturalism for the US and all nativist apartheid when it comes to Israel. There is a psychological term called projection which states you project onto others your own failings. I think it sums up these gatekeepers except the rabble they lost control over supports their vision of Israel too. The only reason to pay attention to Rubin is to get a good belly laugh from her nativist war propaganda for Israel. The comments section at the Washington Post is always better, with most of the people making fun of her instead of agreeing with her.
* Jews are very politically active as a group, but I’ve never seen groups of Jews protest against immigration and the displacement of whites, or violence against whites in the U.S. or Europe. Jews are far more likely to protest against the displacement of Palestinians by Israel than they are to oppose demographic change in the West, or racial violence and rape directed against whites by minorities, and they aren’t very likely to do even that.
* Lot, maybe you can explain to this poor, dumb Gentile why only Jews seem to be qualified to run the USA’s finances, by having control over the US Treasury and the potent FED?
Current US Treasury Secretary is Jacob Lew, his second is Sarah Bloom. Adam Gzubin is the head of the department flinging the economic sanctions against ME nations and Russia.
Past Treasury heads, have been Tim Geithner; Larry Summers and Robert Rubin-who helped Clinton make it easier for Wall Street casinos to steal our money–all Jews and just for pointing out the truth, I’m guilty of anti-Semitism.
The only Gentile recently was Hank Paulson, who was needed during the Great Depression of 2008 to reassure Americans that there is nothing wrong, go back to sleep.
The FED is run by Janet Yellen, whose second in command, Stanley Fisher, is a dual-citizen, who was the past head of an Israel bank. Before Yellen it was ‘Shalom’ Bernanke, and before him it was Alan Greenspan.
But don’t even think or wonder why no Gentile’s are appointed to these crucial positions, because that’s anti-Semitism and you’ll be hounded until you no longer exist in the cyber world.
I could go into who controls the majority of the thoroughly rotten and corrupt US media, but let’s stick with the FED and Treasury.
* Obviously can’t speak for those who believe in an actual overarching jewish conspiracy, but the evidence for disproportionate jewish influence in media and politics is clearly evident to anyone who experiences censorship and even prosecution for expressing opinions that are “anti-Semitic”. Good luck trying to generate such harassment for anybody expressing equivalently anti-white opinions.
As it happens he hasn’t succeeded with that particular piece of harassment yet, although he succeeded in getting me banned from The National Interest and from Spectator Blogs using the same special connection. Clearly there are some jewish people for whom commitment to freedom of speech is more genuine than for others (such as our host here, I assume).
Shall I try writing to the various white non-Jewish owners and managers of some major publications asking them to ban people who’ve been making anti-white comments? How far do you think I’d get?
* I’m used to pushback from all the special interest groups I annoy by skewering their sacred cows. The amount depends upon the readership of the publication in question, generally. But robbersdog’s the first to ever credibly threaten prosecution (in fairness to others, these anti-dissent laws are only nowadays starting to be properly enforced), and the only one to actually succeed in getting me banned, from two publications (The National Interest and the Spectator blogs), though many have reported me for, variously, “homophobic”, “racist”, “sexist” and other comments advocating traditionalist conservative opinions. Clearly, as well as good timing, jewish would-be censors benefit from institutional and political connections at the highest levels, perhaps more so than the run of the mill special interest identity groups.
Mind you I was banned sharpish from the Guardian (many years ago), but I think that was the management’s decision without any special pleading needed. I don’t mind that, as I’d expect openly leftist publications to frown on traditionalist opinions. It’s the ones who pretend to be “conservative” that annoy me, by their dishonesty.
* I was laying in bed watching TV and flipping channels when I saw CNN’s Jake Tapper sitting in for Charlie Rose. Curious I left it there and Jake was talking with some State Department official about Syria. Tapper brought up Trump’s son’s comment ‘Would you eat from a bowl of Skittles if you knew three of them had been poisoned’ in reference to bringing Syrian refugees to the US. The State Department official squirmed as he had no reasonable reply to Tapper. He switched to his ( Jewish) heritage and filibustered with an cartoonish tale about his Bialystok born step father. Auschwitz,Maidenek, Treblinka. He had been in all of them ( but survived, he always survived though no one else from his school did). On a ‘death march’ in 1945 he runs away and again survives and hides in the woods until he hears the rumble of machinery. Were the Nazis sending Panzers to look for the escaped Jew? No, by the grace of God, instead of the hated swastika there was a white star on the tank. The invincible Jew runs out of the woods waving with joy and, instead of a burst of machinegun fire from the American tank, the hatch pops open and a negro tank commander appears!
The story had all the authenticity of a fairy tale and yet here was a senior State Department official reciting ( probably for the 100th time) it as if it was the truth.
*
Are you singing Dixie and attending Nassacre on a regular basis? Are those the pinnacle of American cultural markers?
Forgive the limits of my goyishe kopf but these are the shibboleths of the American culture despised by Jews. Good, bad or indifferent they among other things are part of the dominant culture which alleged to be “assimilating” Jews should be joining in rather than the other way round. That’s the point – you’re not assimilating when you make the dominant culture more palatable to you and more like your own. You’re asserting supremacy.
I’d say football, apple pie, thanksgiving, love for the works of Hemmingway, Faulkner, Melville , Lee are more American. And plenty of Jews do that. In fact I’d speculate without direct evidence that proportionally similar to the general population.
Right! Somebody has to own the teams! Wakka Wakka:
Who else would tell us that Ahab is a repressed homosexual and the white wale a giant phallus? That’s appreciation if I ever heard it!
It is extremely expensive to remain a Jew [a direct corollary being remaining members are generally wealthier].
You’re going to have to explain why and how one’s ethnicity and religion could be unilaterally expunged by an insufficient income.
Yes, and you have observed all this yourself among the many Jews you call friends and neighbours, am I right? It’s unmitigated nonsense. Spare me the ‘patriotic’ drumbeat please and recount your experience, even a few, where you’ve felt a Jewish person pulling cultural rank over you, and I will show you an idiot. Most likely you don’t have any.
I could start with the childhood experiences of being one of a handful of gentiles at a Jewish summer camp for several years seriatim. It doesn’t matter though since no amount of experience and no number of similar experiences to my own would be sufficient for you. I could never satisfy your challenge since it is by design intended not to be satisfied. From childhood Jews are imbued with ethnic and moral chauvinism and among themselves have no compunction about expressing it.
* Jews (or Organized Jewry) in the US have a disproportionate amount of power in financial circles & media (and a few other areas, but that is beside the point). Well- who zombified you guys ? Who prevented you from having equal or greater media clout ? Is Fox News, the most influential newsmedia, actually “Jewish” ?
In the US, Jews are not dominant in banking- overrepresented yes, but not dominant; nor are they much present in other “moneyed” fields like oil & gas or military-industrial complex. Most big US banks don’t have a strong Jewish influence; to speak of Jews among Seven sisters or Lockheed Martin is outright silly.
Also, media in most European countries (Germany, UK, France, Italy, Denmark, Spain,..) & Russia is in the hands of national, non-Jewish elites. And they- Russia apart- all spout the same liberal nonsense.
Jews or no Jews, this is a phase of European & Europe-derived civilization with its own dynamics, causes & effects. Jewry’s influence is not negligible, but also- far from crucial. The weakness lies elsewhere.
Joe Sobran, a syndicated columnist who was himself accused of anti-Semitism a few years ago, offers this perspective on the Pat Buchanan flap: “Jewish claims are being cut down to size in various ways. It’s coded by a lot of Jews as anti-Semitism. I don’t think it is. It’s more like counter-Semitism.”
Sobran says that “counter-Semitism,” unlike anti-Semitism, does not seek a “negative outcome” for Jews. It is an attempt “to bring Jews down to the level of ordinary civil society.” According to Sobran, he shares with Buchanan, a friend, an urge to diminish “the excessive moral prestige Jews have in the media and the public square. . . . Jews deciding the standards, setting the criteria of humanity. Since they set themselves up as the arbiter, there is, if you’ll pardon the expression, a certain kill-the-umpire impulse. . . . People are looking at them and saying, come off it. This period of moral prestige has kind of ended.”
* I would point out that Jewish power is both; it is vast, and fragile. It is the subverted power of others. It is soft power that depends entirely on the assent of other peoples. When Jews’ good name is lost, so is their power. They know this perfectly.
Every big Jew was once a small Jew. They don’t spring from the eye of Zeus, fully-formed.
I’ll quote John Hartung for the umpteenth time:
“In-groups sandwich an outline for animosity, an organizing principle for prejudice, between layers of social support. Whether Christian or Muslim or Jewish, every extremist is supported by a small number of less extreme admirers and each of those supporters is buoyed, in turn, by a larger group of sympathizers. These connections are continuous right down to the bottom of the pyramid, where vaguely sympathetic in-group members are offended by the very extremists who would have no base, and no basis, without them. It is that vague sympathy which needs to be examined.”
* Ethnic networking exists; Jewish ethnocentrism is real; Jews in the US are powerful: but, this is not the dominant, let alone crucial element in the policies of 3rd world immigration swamping, PC muzzle, growing plutocracy & elitism, anti-Euro-American rhetoric in the academia etc.
* There are two sides of the Anglo regard toward Jews, exemplified by the expression, within living memory common among the English, “un-British,” which meant “Jewish.” Like another insular culture’s linguistic distinction of outsiders, “un-British” has its counterpart in the Japanese gaijin.
There is in my experience actually a great deal more evidence of British, especially English, fond romanticizing of Arabs and even of all of Islam, than there is of English fondness for Jews and Judaism.
William Blake’s “Jerusalem” posits the English not as the historical Jewish center of Judeo-Christian culture, but as blessed with the New Testament (New Covenant) opportunity of building “Jerusalem” as the new, English center of Western Civilization “in England’s green and pleasant land.” It is and it remains a distinctly Anglican-Protestant thesis.
Posted inJews|Comments Off on Why Does Organized Jewry Have A Problem With Nativism?
Lindsey Radomski was charged after allegedly showing boys her breasts
She was found not guilty on all charges against her on September 14
Radomski, 33, claims she was drugged at party and the boys attacked her
She says the seven boys thought of her breasts as their property
Radomski, a yoga instructor, said her employer paid for her breast surgery
In testimony, boys claimed Radomski invited them to fondle her breasts
But Radomski’s lawyer claimed his client was the real victim in this case
A yoga teacher has spoken out after she claims she was drugged and teenage boys at a bar mitzvah fondled her recently enhanced breasts because their family paid for the augmentation and they thought of her body as their property.
Lindsey Ann Radomski, 33, was charged with indecent exposure, public sexual indecency, and disorderly conduct after being invited to a party by her employer.
Radomski, a Scottsdale, Arizona, yoga instructor, was found not guilty on all 18 misdemeanor counts against her on September 14.
She faced a sentence of up to six months in jail, a $2,500 fine and three years’ probation if convicted.
Radomski, who said she was blacked out in a back room and believes she was drugged, claimed the boys at the bar mitzvah thought of her breasts as their property, since their families had paid for them.
‘(The boys) came into that room, I was passed out in and (they thought) they could do pretty much do what they wanted to do…and (my breasts) were their families’ property (because they paid for them),’ Radomski told Chris Hansen in an interview after her acquittal.
The alleged incident took place at the home of her employer in March of 2015 when Radomski was 32.
Radomski sat down with Hansen of Crime Watch Daily to speak about the night she says she was attacked by the boys at the bar mitzvah party.
She was accused of flashing her breasts at the minors.
She admits to flashing a group of adults who asked to see her breasts but later that night blacked out, and doesn’t remember anything from that point on.
‘We were at a back table in the backyard. It was dark out. It was just a group of adults having fun, drinking.
‘And in that moment, some of the adults asked me to show my breasts.
‘And that’s when I did. Briefly, for a few moments,’ Radomski told Hansen.
She says she didn’t want to flash the adults her breasts, but said she felt obligated.
‘Granted, there was alcohol involved. As well as feeling that again, feeling that this was not something that I paid for on my own and so I felt like I needed to do that because I was being asked to,’ Radomski said.
In their testimony, the seven boys involved – ages 11 to 15 – claimed Radomski invited them to fondle her breasts after other adults went to bed
Allegations were also made that Radomski engaged in oral sex with a 15-year-old boy.
Radomski is adamant she does not remember this and claimed to have been slipped a date rape drug GHB, according to the Washington Post.
Her lawyer Jocquese Blackwell told a court during an evidentiary hearing that a hair tests proves she was slipped the date rape drug GHB.
‘It’s the most disturbing – really sick thing you can possibly hear. I would never allow that to happen.
Posted inJews|Comments Off on Yoga teacher speaks out on being ‘drugged and fondled’ by boys at bar mitzvah, who ‘thought her breasts were their property because their family had paid for her implants’
* Gwen Carr, mother of Eric Garner; Maria Hamilton, mother of Dontre Hamilton; and Geneva Reed-Veal, mother of Sandra Bland
Yeah it’s interesting to note how the last names of the mothers don’t match up with the kids. Like Mike Brown’s mom’s last name was McSpadden. Trayvon’s mom’s last name was Fulton. I wonder if it has to due with what sociologists refer to as “multi-partner fertility”
* “Matrifocal family”
“Serial polygamy”
“anthropogenic r-selection”
“temporary amazonian zone”
“arachnid mating mimicry”
“hyphenated surname empowerment”
“patriarchy-free zone”
“Great Society mating patterns”
* When two populations have different levels of violence (as blacks and whites do, there being far greater percentage of violent black males than there are white males) and different levels of empathy, it is very hard for the two populations to understand each other or live together.
* Nobody here can look at the bright side.
In many countries people can’t quickly tell who is and who is not physically dangerous to them. In America, especially recently, you can.
* If there could be such a thing as “Fathers of the Movement,” there’d be no need for a movement.
* John McWhorter, who I generally respect, has a piece that touches on the tension blacks feel towards the police in Time.
I am somewhat sympathetic to this in that many black people are treated with suspicion they do not deserve – but on the flipside, it’s a product of the much higher rates of criminality in that segment of America. And while being sensitive to McWhorter’s point, it ignores the fact that black criminality has a hugely destructive effect on the communities in which this problem is concentrated, and non-blacks have a legitimate interest in wanting to see this social problem suppressed as much as it can be through law enforcement.
At the end of the day, it was a depressing read because it illustrates how different parts of the nation are just talking past each other because there is no reconciling their different viewpoints on this issue.
* Hillary probably thinks the way Obama does about black riots. They ‘help her’ by keeping blacks riled up, and she’s hoping they’ll turn out to vote for her instead of staying home, assisted by whites rather like my boneheaded liberal relatives. My mother and father were both carrying on about how horrible the shooting of this poor black guy was, who was just minding his own business reading a book. I pointed out the cops said the guy had a gun, not a book, and that he had an extensive criminal history, but they were not willing to listen or consider the facts. Hillary knows her supporters well.
* Leaders of protests in Ferguson, Baltimore and Baton Rouge were flying into Charlotte Thursday as a third day of action against police violence loomed.
Leaders of some of those protests, such as Michael McBride, a California minister who leads the Live Free campaign against mass incarceration, and Traci Blackmon, an organizer of the Black Lives Matter movement in Ferguson, Mo., traveled to Charlotte.
Corine Mack, president of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg NAACP branch, said Thursday that Charlotte-Mecklenburg police, including Chief Kerr Putney, have worked with local groups to build the kind of relationships that could improve treatment of African-Americans and build trust.
But she and other leaders said the department’s rush to depict Keith Lamont Scott, who was shot to death Tuesday by an officer, as a gunman eroded that progress. So, they said, did the city’s rush to say that the man shot Wednesday was the victim of another protester, even though little was clear through Thursday about what had happened.
* The mainstream left, with Hillary bordering on center-left, are now in favor of engaging in drawn out and exquisite scrutiny of every single officer-involved shooting with a black man in this large country, with the explicit goal of smearing the police and stopping the good policies that has lead to huge reductions in crime since the mid-70′s to early 90′s peak.
That’s how the left loses in American politics.
Ross’s Steve Sailer-naming NYT’s column does good work capturing how the Democrats are flirting with a self-inflicted loss this election, and how they did it once before in the Nixon-Reagan era:
This spirit of political-cultural rebellion is obviously crucial to Trump’s act. As James Parker wrote in The Atlantic, he’s occupying “a space in American politics that is uniquely transgressive, volatile, carnivalesque, and (from a certain angle) punk rock.” (The alt-right-ish columnist Steve Sailer made the punk rock analogy as well.)
Ross not only winked over at us, but also at too at those of us who make the effort to know and understand the history of Western Europe.
Trump’s extremism also limits his appeal, of course. But if liberals are fortunate to be facing a Johnny Rotten figure in this presidential campaign, they are still having real trouble putting him away … and if he were somewhat less volatile and bigoted and gross, liberalism would be poised to close its era of cultural ascendance by watching all three branches of government pass back into conservative hands.
Something like this happened once before: In the 1960s and 1970s, the culture shifted decisively leftward, but American voters shifted to the right and answered a cultural revolution with a political Thermidor.
That Nixon-Reagan rightward shift did not repeal the 1960s or push the counterculture back to a beatnik-hippie fringe. But it did leave liberalism in a curious place throughout the 1980s: atop the commanding heights of culture yet often impotent in Washington, D.C.
* Donald is going to LOVE having Obama hand the keys to the White House over to him. I’m sure he’ll get a little dig in, something like, “Hey, now that I’m president, I’m going to have the CIA locate your actual birth certificate and academic records. I’m really looking forward to reading them.”
* Way wait. Ross is putting Steve in the alt-right camp? Really? I never knew whether Steve accepted that designation, or whether he would decline being included in the alt-right in any official capacity. Sometimes various groups like HBD; Milo; Breitbart; etc. blend together and can appear to be an official part of the alt-right, but its very confusing as to which groups are part of the alt-right and which ones are technically not a part.
I have a feeling that both Jared Taylor and Richard Spencer would very much like Steve to have a more official part of their grouping, but who knows if he would accept their offer? Side note, I’m puzzled sometimes as to why Mr. Taylor hasn’t invited Steve to speak at his American Renaissance conferences.
I suppose one could always just ask him whether Douthat’s inclusion of him with the alt-right is accurate from his perspective.
* She will most certainly be acquitted of manslaughter given the circumstances. Suspect continually disobeys police instructions, walks away to his vehicle, shrugs off a taser, continues to the vehicle and seems to reach in the back window, whereupon the female cop shoots him.
Doesn’t matter if he was just reaching for a toothpick. That was the green light as far as police procedure is concerned.
* If Donald Trump becomes President he will sit on top of the largest information gathering organization in the world. I have no doubt that either all at once or little by little, Obama’s past, which he has spent so much time and resources hiding will get leaked out much to his ever lasting shame. Someday, it will probably be proven that BHO got over promoted just about every step of the way due to affirmative action. It also might be proven that he never registered for selective service and that he wrote all types of atrocious radical dreck in college.
Obama’s birth certificate was just a cap stone or cover story to hide his past. I have heard one long forgotten blogger who I wish I could name refer to it as a McGuffen. When David Axelrod hid Obama’s school transcripts, selective service records, medical records, Baptismal records, etc., he used the birth certificate as a poison pill or passive aggressive boobie trap to blow up whoever tried to uncover his past. After all, any one who is interested just cannot accept the legitimacy of the first African American President.
The only thing more enjoyable than watching President Trump rub Obama’s nose in the proverbial cow pie will be watching Obama’s supporters gasp when he does it.
* The first step is to legalize IQ tests for employment, universities get a lot of market power by being the quasi IQ test. LEgalize that and we (I am a prof) will have to compete and show people are learning something. Various ethnicity studies X majors won’t get any lift from the college degree as IQ test effect. I suspect those majors would add very little to employment opportunities in a world with IQ tests.
Second, don’t let Unis get away with hiring as many foreigners as we want. Every hiring process I have been in (~10) there have been perfectly qualified domestics ranked below foreigners. (Sometimes domestics got the job after foreigners turned it down.) All you need is a decent minimum salary around 120k. Universities can only afford that with superstars and thats fine.
International profs dominating departments means saying anything conservative, much less anti immigration or pro European, is very uncomfortable and will likely get complaints to the dean about you creating a bad work environment. Replacing with domestics will shift things somewhat.
Then, the Trump loan idea is great. Colleges have to help pay back loans that go bad. That will shift us to renumerative fields and also away from affirmative action. Only the richest schools will be able to do AA. An extension would be to make colleges have skin in the game for Pell Grants- they have to pay the government back if graduates don’t have jobs or something like that.
These things could start shifting universities back from the crazy marxist edge.
* Take it easy on that frail, diseased old lady unaccountably running for the presidency of Earth’s most powerful nation — it’s clear she has significant, perhaps severe neurological problems.
She can’t stand longer than a few minutes and needs the assistance of at least two stout men flanking her at all times.
She has seizures brought on by stress, heat, loud noises, and bright lights.
She has uncontrolled coughing attacks that last several minutes.
She undoubtedly qualifies for (and probably receives) Social Security disability.
It was HER TURN in 2008, when she was in better health, but had her coronation stolen from her by a magic negro (TM).
Her husband has humiliated her repeatedly, in public.
What a pathetic creature. And what a pathetic nation that this is the best the Democratic Party could do.
* They are not ‘different parts of the nation’. They are completely different nations altogether. Nor do blacks and whites have different viewpoints on this issue, so much as on every issue. Also noteworthy is that the black rent-a-mob rioters no longer even require a “racist” white cop to start their looting, arson and hysteria.
* The right needs to not just hold power, but also undermine the legitimacy of leftist ideas over the long run.”
Yes, this is the crux of it. Everything else is downstream.
There’s good news and bad news. The good news is that people like our host are doing just that, however (unintentionally) stealthily. The bad news is that you can’t beat something with nothing. The Left’s somethings (Cult Marx, White Privilege, Feminism, etc.) are all false and the Right’s criticisms of them are correct. But being correct as a critic doesn’t make you inheritor of the throne. To inherit the throne you not only have to depose the usurper, you have to show you’re the legitimate heir.
So far, the Right has been correct, if only partially effective, at discrediting the Left’s ascendancy. But the throne can’t just remain vacant. I don’t know if this is some natural law, or if it is just that people in general are too immature to go about their lives without some ruling ideology, but whatever the reason, it is apparent that a vacant throne attracts vagrants, so it needs to be occupied, and the more right and Right the occupier, the better.
Unfortunately, if the current Left is a Coalition of the Fringes united by the Left’s falsehoods and group-hate, the current Right consists of Confederation of the Anti-Fringes united by disgust with the Left’s lies and threats to their livelihoods and lives. Unfortunately, the Left’s lies are a Something (based on an identifiable though false theme) while the Right’s anti-lies are ultimately a Nothing because they lack any unifying theme other than resistance, and a Nothing, however true, will never beat the Something, however false.
Posted inAlt Right, Barack Obama, Blacks, BLM|Comments Off on Steve Sailer: Clinton Sent “Mothers of the Movement” to Campaign Against Police in Charlotte Hours Before Riots Broke Out
"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)
This put them on edge. You can see it in the debate. Stephens actually plays the 