The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenters to FollowHide Excerpts
By Authors Filter?
Anatoly Karlin Andrei Martyanov Andrew J. Bacevich Andrew Joyce Andrew Napolitano Boyd D. Cathey Chanda Chisala Eamonn Fingleton Eric Margolis Forum Fred Reed Agnostic DavidB P-ter Godfree Roberts Gustavo Arellano Ilana Mercer Israel Shamir James Kirkpatrick James Petras James Thompson JayMan John Derbyshire Jonathan Revusky Kevin MacDonald Linh Dinh Michael Hudson Mike Whitney Pat Buchanan Patrick Cockburn Paul Craig Roberts Paul Gottfried Paul Kersey Peter Frost Peter Lee Philip Giraldi Philip Weiss Razib Khan Robert Weissberg Ron Paul Ron Unz Stephen J. Sniegoski Steve Sailer The Saker Tom Engelhardt A. Graham Adam Hochschild Aedon Cassiel Ahmet Öncü Alexander Cockburn Alexander Hart Alfred McCoy Alison Rose Levy Alison Weir Anand Gopal Andre Damon Andrew Cockburn Andrew Fraser Andy Kroll Ann Jones Anonymous Anthony DiMaggio Ariel Dorfman Arlie Russell Hochschild Arno Develay Arnold Isaacs Artem Zagorodnov Astra Taylor Austen Layard Aviva Chomsky Ayman Fadel Barbara Ehrenreich Barbara Garson Barbara Myers Barry Lando Belle Chesler Ben Freeman Beverly Gologorsky Bill Black Bill Moyers Bob Dreyfuss Bonnie Faulkner Book Brad Griffin Brenton Sanderson Brett Redmayne-Titley Brian Dew C.J. Hopkins Carl Horowitz Catherine Crump Charles Bausman Charles Goodhart Charles Wood Charlotteville Survivor Chase Madar Chris Hedges Chris Roberts Christian Appy Christopher DeGroot Chuck Spinney Coleen Rowley Cooper Sterling Craig Murray Dahr Jamail Dan E. Phillips Dan Sanchez Daniel McAdams Danny Sjursen Dave Kranzler Dave Lindorff David Barsamian David Bromwich David Chibo David Gordon David North David Vine David Walsh David William Pear Dean Baker Dennis Saffran Diana Johnstone Dilip Hiro Dirk Bezemer Ed Warner Edmund Connelly Eduardo Galeano Ellen Cantarow Ellen Packer Ellison Lodge Eric Draitser Eric Zuesse Erik Edstrom Erika Eichelberger Erin L. Thompson Eugene Girin F. Roger Devlin Franklin Lamb Frida Berrigan Friedrich Zauner Gabriel Black Gary Corseri Gary North Gary Younge Gene Tuttle George Albert George Bogdanich George Szamuely Georgianne Nienaber Glenn Greenwald A. Beaujean Alex B. Amnestic Arcane Asher Bb Bbartlog Ben G Birch Barlow Canton ChairmanK Chrisg Coffee Mug Darth Quixote David David B David Boxenhorn Diana Dkane DMI Dobeln Duende Dylan Ericlien Fly Gcochran Godless Grady Herrick Jake & Kara Jason Collins Jason Malloy Jason s Jeet Jemima Joel John Emerson John Quiggin JP Kele Kjmtchl Mark Martin Matoko Kusanagi Matt Matt McIntosh Michael Vassar Miko Ml Ole Piccolino Rosko Schizmatic Scorpius Suman TangoMan The Theresa Thorfinn Thrasymachus Wintz Greg Grandin Greg Johnson Gregoire Chamayou Gregory Foster Gregory Hood Gregory Wilpert Guest Admin Hannah Appel Hans-Hermann Hoppe Harri Honkanen Henry Cockburn Hina Shamsi Howard Zinn Hubert Collins Hugh McInnish Ira Chernus Jack Kerwick Jack Rasmus Jack Ravenwood Jack Sen James Bovard James Carroll James Fulford Jane Lazarre Jared S. Baumeister Jared Taylor Jason C. Ditz Jason Kessler Jay Stanley Jeff J. Brown Jeffrey Blankfort Jeffrey St. Clair Jen Marlowe Jeremiah Goulka Jeremy Cooper Jesse Mossman Jim Daniel Jim Kavanagh JoAnn Wypijewski Joe Lauria Johannes Wahlstrom John W. Dower John Feffer John Fund John Harrison Sims John Pilger John Reid John Stauber John Taylor John V. Walsh John Williams Jon Else Jonathan Alan King Jonathan Anomaly Jonathan Rooper Jonathan Schell Joseph Kishore Juan Cole Judith Coburn K.R. Bolton Karel Van Wolferen Karen Greenberg Kelley Vlahos Kersasp D. Shekhdar Kevin Barrett Kevin Rothrock Kevin Zeese Kshama Sawant Lance Welton Laura Gottesdiener Laura Poitras Laurent Guyénot Lawrence G. Proulx Leo Hohmann Linda Preston Logical Meme Lorraine Barlett M.G. Miles Mac Deford Maidhc O Cathail Malcolm Unwell Marcus Alethia Marcus Cicero Margaret Flowers Mark Danner Mark Engler Mark Perry Matt Parrott Mattea Kramer Matthew Harwood Matthew Richer Matthew Stevenson Max Blumenthal Max Denken Max North Maya Schenwar Michael Gould-Wartofsky Michael Hoffman Michael Schwartz Michael T. Klare Murray Polner Nan Levinson Naomi Oreskes Nate Terani Nathan Cofnas Ned Stark Nelson Rosit Nicholas Stix Nick Kollerstrom Nick Turse Nils Van Der Vegte Noam Chomsky Nomi Prins Norman Finkelstein Patrick Cleburne Patrick Cloutier Paul Cochrane Paul Engler Paul Nachman Paul Nehlen Pepe Escobar Peter Brimelow Peter Gemma Peter Van Buren Pierre M. Sprey Pratap Chatterjee Publius Decius Mus Rajan Menon Ralph Nader Ramin Mazaheri Ramziya Zaripova Randy Shields Ray McGovern Rebecca Gordon Rebecca Solnit Richard Krushnic Richard Silverstein Rick Shenkman Rita Rozhkova Robert Baxter Robert Bonomo Robert Fisk Robert Lipsyte Robert Parry Robert Roth Robert S. Griffin Robert Scheer Robert Trivers Robin Eastman Abaya Roger Dooghy Ronald N. Neff Rory Fanning Sam Francis Sam Husseini Sayed Hasan Sharmini Peries Sheldon Richman Spencer Davenport Spencer Quinn Stefan Karganovic Steffen A. Woll Stephanie Savell Stephen J. Rossi Steve Fraser Steven Yates Sydney Schanberg Tanya Golash-Boza Ted Rall Theodore A. Postol Thierry Meyssan Thomas Frank Thomas O. Meehan Tim Shorrock Tim Weiner Tobias Langdon Todd E. Pierce Todd Gitlin Todd Miller Tom Piatak Tom Suarez Tom Sunic Tracy Rosenberg Virginia Dare Vladimir Brovkin Vox Day W. Patrick Lang Walter Block William Binney William DeBuys William Hartung William J. Astore Winslow T. Wheeler Ximena Ortiz Yan Shen Zhores Medvedev
Nothing found
By Topics/Categories Filter?
2016 Election Alt Right American Media American Military Anti-Semitism Blacks Books China Conspiracy Theories Crime Culture Donald Trump Economics Education Foreign Policy Genetics Hillary Clinton History Human Biodiversity Ideology Illegal Immigration Immigration IQ Iran ISIS Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Jews Miscellaneous Movies Neocons Obama Open Thread Political Correctness Political Economy Politics Race/Ethnicity Real Estate Russia Science Sports Syria Terrorism Ukraine 2008 Election 2010 Census 2012 Election 2012 US Elections 23andMe 9/11 A Farewell To Alms A Song Of Ice And Fire A Troublesome Inheritance Aarab Barghouti Abc News Abigail Marsh Abortion Abraham Lincoln Abu Ghraib Academia Access Journalism Acheivement Gap Achievement Gap Acid Attacks Adam Schiff Adaptation Addiction Admin Administration ADMIXTOOLS Admixture Adoptees Adoption AEI Affective Empathy Affirmative Action Affordable Family Formation Afghanistan Africa African Americans African Genetics Africans Afrikaner Afrocentricism Age Of Malthusian Industrialism Aging Agriculture AIDS Ainu AIPAC Aircraft Carriers Al Jazeera Al-Qaeda Alan Clemmons Alan Dershowitz Alan Macfarlane Albion's Seed Alcohol Alcoholism Alexander Hamilton Alexei Kudrin Alexei Navalny Algeria Alt Left Altruism Amazon.com American Atheists American Exceptionalism American History American Jews American Left American Legion American Nations American Nations American Pravda American Prisons American Renaissance Amerindians Amish Amish Quotient Amnesty Amnesty International Amoral Familialism Amy Chua Amygdala Anaconda Anatoly Karlin Ancestry Ancient DNA Ancient Genetics Ancient Jews Ancient Near East Anders Breivik Andrei Nekrasov Andrew Jackson Androids Angela Stent Angelina Jolie Anglo-Saxons Ann Coulter Anne Heche Annual Country Reports On Terrorism Anthropology Anti-Gentilism Anti-Vaccination Antifa Antiquity Antiracism Antisocial Behavior Antiwar Movement Apartheid Apollo's Ascent Appalachia Appalachians Arab Christianity Arab Spring Arabs Archaeogenetics Archaeology Archaic DNA Archaic Humans Architecture Arctic Resources Arctic Sea Ice Melting Argentina Arkham's Razor Armenia Army Army-McCarthy Hearings Arnon Milchan Art Arthur Jensen Arthur Lichte Artificial Intelligence Aryan Invasion Theory Aryans Ash Carter Ashkenazi Intelligence Ashkenazi Jews Asian Americans Asian Quotas Asians Ask A ScienceBlogger ASPM Assange Assassinations Assimilation Assortative Mating Atheism Atlantic Council Attila The Hun Attractive Nuisance Doctrine Attractiveness Attractiveness Australia Australian Aboriginals Austria Austro-Asiatic Austro-Hungarian Empire authoritarianism Autism Automation Avigdor Lieberman Ayodhhya Azerbaijan Babes And Hunks Babri Masjid Baby Gap Backlash Bacterial Vaginosis Bad Poetry Bahrain Balanced Polymorphism Balkans Baltics Baltimore Riots Banana Republicans Bangladesh Bangladeshis Banking Industry Banking System Banks Barack H. Obama Barack Obama Barbara Comstock Barbarians Barone Baseball Baseball Statistics Bashar Al-Assad Basketball #BasketOfDeplorables Basque Baumeister BDS Movement Beauty Behavior Genetics Behavioral Economics Behavioral Genetics Belarus Belgium Ben Cardin Benghazi Benjamin Cardin Benjamin Netanyahu Berezovsky Bernard Henri-Levy Bernard Lewis Bernie Sanders Bernies Sanders #BernieSoWhite Beta Males BICOM Big History BigPost Bilingual Education Bill 59 Bill Clinton Bill Kristol Bill Maher Billionaires Billy Graham Biodiversity Bioethics Biology Birth Order Bisexuality Bisexuals BJP Black Crime Black History Black Lives Matter Black Metal Black Muslims #BlackJobsMatter #BlackLiesMurder Blade Runner Blog Blogging Blond Hair Blondism Blood Libel Blue Eyes Boasian Anthropology boats-in-the-water bodybuilding Boers Bolshevik Revolution Border Security Borderlander Borderlanders Boris Johnson Boycott Divest And Sanction Boycott Divestment And Sanctions Brahmans Brain Brain Scans Brain Size Brain Structure Brazil Breeder's Equation Bret Stephens Brexit Brezhnev Brian Boutwell BRICs Brighter Brains Britain Burakumin Burma Bush Bush Administration Business Cagots California Californication Cambodia Cameron Russell Camp Of The Saints Campaign For Liberty Campus Rape Canada #Cancel2022WorldCupinQatar Cancer Candida Albicans Capitalism Cardiovascular Disease Care Package Carlos Slim Carly Fiorina Caroline Glick Carroll Quigley Cars Carter Page Castes Catalonia Catfight Catholic Church Catholicism Caucasus Cavaliers Cecil Rhodes Censorship Central Asia Chanda Chisala Charles Darwin Charles Krauthammer Charles Murray Charles Schumer Charleston Shooting Charlie Hebdo Charlie Rose Charlottesville Checheniest Chechen Of Them All Chechens Chechnya Cherlie Hebdo Chetty Chicagoization Child Labor Children China/America China Stock Market Meltdown China Vietnam Chinese Chinese Communist Party Chinese Economy Chinese Evolution Chinese History Chinese IQ Chinese Language Chinese People Chlamydia Chris Gown Chris Stringer Christianity Christmas Christopher Steele Chuck Hagel Chuck Schumer CIA Cinema Circumcision Civil Liberties Civil Rights Civil War Civilization CJIA Clannishness Clans Class Classical History Climate Climate Change Clinton Cliodynamics Clovis clusterfake Coal Coalition Coalition Of The Fringes Cochran And Harpending Coefficient Of Relationship Coen Brothers Cognitive Elitism Cognitive Empathy Cognitive Psychology Cognitive Science Cold War Colin Kaepernick Colin Woodard College Admission Colonialism Color Revolution Columba Bush Comments Communism Community Reinvestment Act Compton Confederacy Confederate Flag Conflict Of Interest Congress Conquistador-American Consanguinity Consequences Conservatism Conservative Movement Conservatives Constitution Constitutional Theory Consumer Debt Convergence Core Article Cornel West Corruption Corruption Perception Index Corruption Perceptions Index Cousin Marriage Cover Story Creationism CRIF Crimea Crimean Tatars Crimethink Crisis Crispr Crops crops-rotting-in-the-fields Cruise Missiles Crying Among The Farmland Ctrl-Left Cuba Cuckold Envy Cuckoldry Cuckservative Cultural Anthropology Cultural Evolution Cultural Marxism Cut The Sh*t Guys Czech Republic DACA Daily Data Dump Dalai Lama Dallas Shooting Damnatio Memoriae Dana Milbank Daren Acemoglu Dark Ages Darwinism Data Data Analysis Data Posts David Foster Wallace David Friedman David Frum David Goldenberg David Hackett Fischer David Ignatius David Kramer David Lane David Moser David Petraeus Davide Piffer De Ploribus Unum Death Death Penalty Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Debt Declaration Of Universal Human Rights Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire Deep Sleep Deep South Deep State Demic Diffusion Democracy Democratic Party Democrats Demographic Transition Demographics Demography Denisovans Denmark Dennis Ross Department Of Justice Deprivation Deregulation Derek Harvey Detroit Development Developmental Noise Diabetes Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders Dick Cheney Dienekes Diet Dinesh D'Souza Dirty Bomb Discrimination discussion Disease Disney Disparate Impact Displaced And Refugees Dissent Diversity Diversity Before Diversity Diversity Pokemon Points Dmitry Medvedev DNA Dodecad Dogs Dollar Donme Dopamine Down Syndrome Dr James Thompson Dreams From My Father Dresden Drew Barrymore Drone War Drones Drought Drugs DSM DTC Personal Genomics Duterte Dylan Roof Dynasty Dysgenic E-books E. O. Wilson East Asia East Asian Exception East Asians Eastern Europe Ebola Ecology Economic Development Economic History Economic Sanctions Economic Theory Economy Ed Miller Edward Gibbon Edward Price Edward Snowden Effective Altruism Efraim Diveroli Egor Kholmogorov Egypt Eisenhower Elections Electric Cars Elie Wiesel Eliot Cohen Eliot Engel Elites Elizabeth Holmes Elliot Abrams Elliot Rodger Elliott Abrams Elon Musk Emigration Emil Kirkegaard Emmanuel Macron Emmanuel Todd Empathy Energy England Enhanced Interrogations Environment Environmentalism Epigenetics Epistemology Erdogan EROEI Espionage Estonia Estrogen Ethics Ethiopia Ethnic Genetic Interests Ethnic Nepotism Ethnicity EU Eugenics Eurabia Eurasia Euro Europe European Genetics European Genomics European History European Right European Union Europeans Eurozone Everything Evolution Evolutionary Biology Evolutionary Genetics Evolutionary Genomics Evolutionary Psychology Exercise Eye Color Eyes Ezra Cohen-Watnick Face Recognition Face Shape Facebook Faces Fake News fallout False Flag Attack Family Family Matters Fantasy Far Abroad Farmers Farming Fascism Fat Shaming FBI FDA Federal Reserve Female Homosexuality Female Sexual Response FEMEN Feminism Feminists Ferguson Ferguson Shooting Fertility Fertility Fertility Rates Fethullah Gulen Feuds Fiction Fields Medals FIFA Film Finance Financial Bailout Financial Bubbles Financial Debt Financial Sector Financial Times Finland Finn Baiting Finnish Content First Amendment First World War FISA Fitness Flight From White Fluctuarius Argenteus Flynn Effect Food Football Forecasts Foreign Policy Foreign Service Fracking France Francis Gary Powers Frank Salter Frankfurt School Frantz Fanon Franz Boas Freakonomics Fred Hiatt Fred Reed Frederic Hof Free Speech Free Trade Free Will Freedom Of Speech Freedom French Canadians French Paradox Friday Fluff Friendly & Conventional Front National Frontlash Funny Futurism Gaddafi Game Game Of Nations Game Of Thrones Gangs Gardnerella Vaginalis Gary Taubes Gay Germ Gay Marriage Gays/Lesbians Gaza Gemayel Clan Gender Gender And Sexuality Gender Confusion Gender Equality Gender Identity Disorder Gender Reassignment Gender Relations Gene-Culture Coevolution Genealogy General Intelligence General Social Survey Genes Genetic Diversity Genetic Engineering Genetic History Genetic Load Genetic Pacification Genetics Of Height Genocide Genomics Gentrification Geography Geopolitics George Bush George Clooney George Patton George R. R. Martin George Soros George Tenet George W. Bush Georgia Germans Germany Gina Haspel Gladwell Glenn Beck Global Terrorism Index Global Warming Globalism Globalization GMO God Delusion Golf Google Google Data Explorer Gordon Gallup Goths Government Debt Government Incompetence Government Spending Government Surveillance Graphs GRE Great Leap Forward #GreatWhiteDefendantPrivilege Greece Greeks Green Greg Clark Greg Cochran Gregory Clark Gregory Cochran GRF Grooming Group Intelligence Group Selection GSS Guangzhou Guardian Guardian Censorship Guest Guilt Culture Gun Control Guns Gypsies H-1B H.R. McMaster H1-B Visas Haim Saban Hair Color Hair Lengthening Haiti Hajnal Line Half Sigma Halloween Hamas Hamilton: An American Musical Hamilton's Rule HammerHate Hanzi Happiness Harappa Ancestry Project Harriet Tubman Harvard Harvey Weinstein Hasbara hate Hate Crimes hate-fraud hate-hoax Hate Hoaxes Hate Speech HateStat Havelock Ellis Hbd Hbd Chick Hbd Fallout HBDchick Health Health And Medicine Health Care Healthcare Heart Disease Heart Health Heather Norton Hegira Height Height Privilege Helmuth Nyborg Henry Harpending Herbert John Fleure Heredity Heritability Hexaco Hezbollah Himachal Pradesh Hindu Caste System Hiroshima Hispanic Crime Hispanics Hist kai Historical Genetics Historical Population Genetics Hitler Hodgepodge Hollywood Holocaust Homicide Homicide Rate homicides Homophobia Homosexuality Houellebecq House Intelligence Committee Housing Hox Hoxby HplusNRx Hubbert's Peak Huddled Masses Hug Thug Human Achievement human-capital Human Evolution Human Evolutionary Genetics Human Evolutionary Genomics Human Genetics Human Genome Human Genomics Human Nature Human Rights Human Variation Humor Hungary Hunt For The Great White Defendant Hunter-Gatherers Hunting Hybridization Hypocrisy Hypodescent I Love Italians I.Q. I.Q. Genomics #IBelieveInHavenMonahan Ibn Khaldun Ibo Ice T Iceland Ideology And Worldview Idiocracy Igbo Igor Strelkov Ilana Mercer IMF immigrants Immigration immigration-policy-terminology Immigriping Imperial Presidency Imperialism Imran Awan Inbreeding Incest Income India India Genetics Indian Economy Indian Genetics Indian Genomics Indian IQ Indians Individualism Indo-European Indo-Europeans Indonesia industrialization Inequality Infection Theory Inflation Infrastructure inosmi Intellectuals Intelligence International Affairs International Comparisons International Relations Internet Internet Research Agency Interracial Interracial Marriage Intersectionality Interviews Introgression Inuit Invade Invite In Hock Invade The World Invite The World Invasive Species Ioannis Metaxas Iosef Stalin Iosif Lazaridis Iosif Stalin Iq Iq And Wealth Iran Nuclear Agreement Iran Nuclear Program Iranian Nuclear Program Iranian Nuclear Weapons Program Iraq Iraq War Ireland Is It Good For The Jews? Is Love Colorblind ISIS. Terrorism Islam Islamic Jihad Islamic State Islamism Islamist-liberal Alliance Islamophobia Islamophobiaphobia Isolationism Israel Defense Force Israeli Occupation Israeli Settlements Israeli Spying IT Italy J. Edgar Hoover Jack Keane Jake Tapper Jamaica James Clapper James Comey James Mattis James Watson James Wooley Jane Mayer Janet Yellen Japan Jared Diamond Jared Kushner Jared Taylor Jason Malloy JASTA Jayman Jr. JCPOA ¡Jeb! Jeb Bush Jeffrey Shuren Jennifer Rubin Jensen Jeremy Corbyn Jerrold Nadler Jerry Seinfeld Jesse Bering Jesuits Jewish Genetics Jewish History Jewish Intellectuals JFK Assassination Jill Stein Jim Crow Joe Cirincione John Allen John B. Watson John Boehner John Bolton John Brennan John Derbyshire John Durant John F. Kennedy John Hawks John Kasich John Kerry John McCain John McLaughlin John McWhorter John Mearsheimer John Michael Greer John Tooby John Updike Jonathan Pollard Joseph McCarthy Journalism Judaism Judge George Daniels Judicial System Judith Harris Julia Ioffe Kaboom Kalash Katz Keith Ellison Ken Livingstone Kenneth Marcus Kenneth Pomeranz Kennewick Man Kerry Killinger Kevin MacDonald Kevin McCarthy Kevin Mitchell Kevin Williamson Kids These Days Kim Jong Un Kin Selection Kindle Kinship Kissing Kkk KKKrazy Glue Of The Coalition Of The Fringes Knesset Kompromat Korea Korean War Kosovo Kremlin Clans Ksenia Sobchak Ku Klux Klan Kurds Kurt Campbell LA Lady Gaga Lame Jesse Jackson Imitations Lame News Language Languages Larry Summers Las Vegas Massacre Late Obama Age Collapse Late Ov Latin America Latinos Latvia Law Law Of Supply And Demand Law Laws Of Behavioral Genetics Lazy Glossophiliac Lead Poisoning Learning Lebanon Leda Cosmides Lee Kuan Yew Left/Right Lenin Lesbians Lèse-diversité LGBT Liberal Creationism Liberal Opposition Liberalism Liberals Libertarianism Libertarians Libya life-expectancy Lifestyle Light Skin Preference Lindsay Graham Lindsey Graham Linguistics Links Literacy Literature Litvinenko Living Standards Lloyd Blankfein Logan's Run Loooong Books Looting Lorde Love Dolls Lover Boys Lutherans Lyndon Johnson M Factor M.g. Machiavellianism Mad Men Madeleine Albright Madoff Magritte Mahmoud Abbas Malaysian Airlines MH17 Male Homosexuality Malnutrition Malthusianism Manor Manorialism Manspreading Manufacturing Mao Zedong Maoism Map Map Posts maps Marc Faber Marco Rubio Marcomentum! Marijuana Marine Le Pen mark-adomanis Mark Steyn Mark Warner Market Economy Marketing Major Postmodernism Marriage Martin Luther King Marwan Barghouti Marxism Masculinity Masha Gessen Mass Shootings Massacre In Nice Mate Choice Math Mathematics Matthew Weiner Max Blumenthal Max Boot Mayans McCain McCain/POW Mearsheimer-Walt Measurement Error Media Medicine Medvedev Mega-Aggressions Megan Fox Megyn Kelly Melanesians Melanin Memorial Day Men With Gold Chains Mental Illness Mental Traits Meritocracy Merkel Merkel Youth Merkel's Boner Mesolithic Mexican-American War Mexican Mediocrity Mexico Michael Anton Michael Flynn Michael Jackson Michael Morell Michael Pompeo Michael Weiss Michelle Bachmann Michelle Ma Belle Michelle Obama Microaggressions Microcephalin Microsoft Middle Ages Middle East Migration Mike Pence Mike Pompeo Mike Signer Mikhail Khodorkovsky Militarization Military Military Analysis Military History Military Spending Military Technology Milner Group Minimum Wage Minorities Mirror Neurons Misdreavus Missile Defense Missing The Point Mitt Romney Mixed-Race Model Minority Modern Humans Mohammed Bin Salman Moldova Monogamy Moore's Law Moral Absolutism Moral Universalism Morality Mormonism Mormons Mortality Mortgage Moscow Mossad Moxie Moynihan's Law Of The Canadian Border Mozilo MTDNA Mulatto Elite Multiculturalism Multiregional Model Multiregionalism Music Muslim Muslim Ban Muslims Mutual Assured Destruction My Lai Myanmar NAEP NAMs Nancy Segal Narendra Modi Natalism National Assessment Of Educational Progress National Immigration Safety And Quality Board National Question National Review National Security State National Security Strategy National Wealth Nationalism Native Americans NATO Natural Selection Nature Vs. Nurture navalny Naz Shah Nazi Nazism Nbc News Neandertal Neandertals Neanderthals Near Abroad Ned Flanders Neo-Nazis Neoconservatism Neoconservatives Neoliberalism Neolithic Neolithic Revolution Neoreaction Nerds Netherlands Neuroscience New Atheists New Cold War New France New Rules New Silk Road New World New World Order New York New York City New York Times News Neymar Nicholas Wade Nick Eberstadt Nieto Nigeria Night In The Museum Nikki Haley NIMBY Nobel Prize Nobel Prized #NobelsSoWhiteMale Nordics North Africa North Korea Northwest Europe Norway #NotOkay Novorossiya Sitrep NSA Nuclear Power Nuclear Proliferation Nuclear War Nuclear Weapons Nurture Assumption Nutrition O Mio Babbino Caro Obamacare Obamanomics Obesity Obey Giant! Obituary Obscured American Occam's Butterknife Occam's Razor Occam's Rubber Room Occupy Oil Oliver Stone Olympics Open Borders Operational Sex Ratio Opinion Poll Opioids Orban Organ Transplants Orissa Orlando Shooting Orthodoxy Orwell Osama Bin Laden Out-of-Africa Out Of Africa Model Out Of African Outbreeding Oxytocin Paekchong Pakistan Pakistani Paleoamerindians Paleoanthropology Paleolibertarianism Paleolithic Paleolithic Europeans Paleontology Palestine Palestinians Palin Pamela Geller Panama Papers Panhandling Paper Review Parasite Manipulation Parenting Parenting Parenting Behavioral Genetics Paris Attacks Parsi Partly Inbred Extended Family Pathogens Patriot Act Patriotism Paul Ewald Paul Krugman Paul Manafort Paul Ryan Paul Singer Paul Wolfowitz Pavel Grudinin Pax Americana Peak Oil Pearl Harbor Pedophilia Pentagon Perception Management Personal Personal Genomics Personality Peter Frost Peter Turchin P&G Phil Onderdonk Phil Rushton Philip Breedlove Philippines Philosophy Philosophy Of Science Phylogenetics Pigmentation Pigs Piketty Pioneer Hypothesis PISA Pizzagate Planned Parenthood Poetry Pol Pot Poland Police State Police Training Political Correctness Makes You Stupid Political Philosophy Politicians Polls Polygamy Polygenic Score Polygyny Poor Reading Skills Pope Francis Population Population Genetics Population Growth Population Replacement Population Structure Population Substructure Populism Porn Pornography Portugal Post 201 Post-Modernism Post-Nationalism Poverty PRC Prediction Prenatal Hormones Prescription Drugs Press Censorship Prester John Prince Bandar Priti Patel Privatization Productivity Profiling Progressives Projection Pronoun Crisis Propaganda Prostitution Protectionism protest Protestantism Psychology Psychometrics Psychopaths Psychopathy Pubertal Timing Public Health Public Schools Puerto Rico Punishment Puritans Putin Putin Derangement Syndrome Putinsliv Pygmies Qatar Quakers Quantitative Genetics Quebec R. A. Fisher Race Race And Crime Race And Genomics Race And Iq Race And Religion Race/Crime Race Denialism Race/IQ race-realism Race Riots Rachel Dolezal Rachel Maddow Racial Intelligence Racial Profiling Racial Reality Racism Racist Objects Menace Racist Pumpkin Incident Radical Islam Rand Paul Randy Fine Rap Music Rape Raqqa Rationality Razib Khan R&D Reader Survey Reading RealWorld Recep Tayyip Erdogan Reciprocal Altruism Reconstruction Red State Blue State Red States Blue States redlining Redneck Dunkirk Refugee Boy Refugee Crisis #refugeeswelcome #RefugeesWelcomeInQatar Regression To The Mean Religion Religion Religion And Philosophy Rentier Replication Reprint Reproductive Strategy Republican Party Republicans Responsibility Retconning Reuel Gerecht Review Revolution Of 1905 Revolutions Rex Tillerson Ricci Richard Dawkins Richard Dyer Richard Lewontin Richard Lynn Richard Nixon Richard Russell Rick Perry RIP rise-of-the-rest Ritholtz Robert Ford Robert Kraft Robert Lindsay Robert McNamara Robert Mueller Robert Mugabe Robert Spencer Robocop Robots Roger Ailes Rohingya Rolling Stone Roman Empire Rome Romney Ron Paul Ron Unz Ronald Reagan Ross Perot Rotherham Rove Roy Moore RT International Rushton Russell Kirk Russiagate Russian Demography Russian Economy Russian Elections 2018 Russian Far East Russian History Russian Media Russian Military Russian Nationalism Russian Occupation Government Russian Orthodox Church Russian Politics Russian Reaction Russian Society Russian Spies Russophobes Ruth Benedict Saakashvili sabermetrics Sabrina Rubin Erdely Sailer's First Law Of Female Journalism Saint Peter Tear Down This Gate! Saint-Petersburg Sam Harris Same Sex Attraction Same-sex Marriage Sammy Sosa San Bernadino Massacre Sandra Beleza Sandy Hook Sapir-Whorf Sarah Palin Sarin Gas SAT Satoshi Kanazawa Saudi Arabia Saying What You Have To Say Scandinavia Schizophrenia School Science Denialism Science Fiction Scotch-irish Scotland Scots Irish Scott Ritter Scrabble Secession Select Select Post Selection Self-obsession Separating The Truth From The Nonsense Serbia Sergei Magnitsky Sergei Skripal Sergey Brin Sex Sex Differences Sex Ratio Sex Ratio At Birth Sex Recognition Sex Tape Sexual Dimorphism Sexual Division Of Labor Sexual Fluidity Sexual Identity Sexual Orientation Sexual Selection Shai Masot Shakespeare Shame Culture Shanghai Shared Environment Shekhovstov Sheldon Adelson Shias And Sunnis Shimon Arad Shmuley Boteach Shorts And Funnies Shoshana Bryen Shurat HaDin Shyness Sibel Edmonds Silicon Valley Singapore Single Men Single Mothers Single Women Six Day War SJWs Skin Color Skin Tone Skunk Works Slate Slave Trade Slavery Slavery Reparations Slavoj Zizek Slavs SLC24A5 Sleep Smart Fraction Smoking Social Justice Warriors Social Media Social Science Socialism Society Sociobiology Sociology Sociopathy Sociosexuality Solar Energy Solutions Solzhenitsyn Songun Sotomayor South Africa South Asia South Asian Genetics South China Sea South Korea Southeast Asia Southern Poverty Law Center Soviet History Soviet Union Space Space Exploration Space Program Spain SPLC Sport Sputnik News Srebrenica Stabby Somali Staffan Stage Stalinism Standardized Tests Star Trek Comparisons State Department State Formation States Rights Statistics Statue Of Liberty Statue Of Libertyism Statute Of Diversity Statute Of Immigration Statute Of Liberty Steny Hoyer Stephan Guyenet Stephen Cohen Stephen Colbert Stephen Hadley Stephen Jay Gould Stereotypes Steroids Steve Bannon Steve Sailer Steven Pinker Steven Spielberg Steve's Rice Thresher Columns Still Not Free Buddy Strategic Affairs Ministry Student Loans Stuff White People Like Stuxnet Sub-replacement Fertility Sub-Saharan Africa Sub-Saharan Africans Submission Subprime Mortgage Crisis Subrealism Suicide Supercomputers Superintelligence Supreme Court Survey Susan Glasser Svidomy Sweden Switzerland Syed Farook syr Syrian Civil War Syriza T.S. Eliot Ta-Nehisi Coates Taiwan Tajikistan Taki Taliban Tamerlan Tsarnaev Tamil Nadu Tashfeen Malik Tax Cuts Tax Evasion Taxes Tea Party Team Performance Technology Ted Cruz Television Terrorists Tesla Testing Testosterone Tests Texas Thailand The AK The Bell Curve The Better Angels Of Our Nature The Bible The Black Autumn The Breeder's Equation The Confederacy The Deep South The Economist The Eight Banditos The Future The Gap The Golfocaust The Kissing Billionaire The Left The Lobby The Megaphone The New York Times The Saker The Scramble For America The Son Also Rises The South The Washington Post The Zeroth Amendment To The Constitution Theranos Theresa May Thermoeconomics Third World Thomas Aquinas Thomas Jefferson Thomas Perez Thomas Talhelm Thurgood Marshall Tibet Tidewater Tiger Mom Tiger Woods TIMSS TNC Tobin Tax Tom Cotton Tom Hanks Tom Wolfe Tony Blair Too Many White People Torture Trade Trans-Species Polymorphism Transgenderism Transhumanism Translation Translations Transsexuals Travel Trayvon Martin Trolling Tropical Humans Trudeau True Redneck Stereotypes Trump Trump Derangement Syndrome Trust Tsarist Russia Tsarnaev Tulsi Gabbard Turkey Turks TWA 800 Twin Study Twins Twintuition Twitter UK UKIP Ukrainian Crisis Unanswerable Questions Unbearable Whiteness Underperformin' Norman Mineta Unemployment Union Unions United Kingdom United Nations United States Universal Basic Income Universalism unwordly Upper Paleolithic Urbanization US Blacks US Civil War II US Elections 2016 US-Russia.org Expert Discussion Panel USA Used Car Dealers Moral Superiority Of USS Liberty Uttar Pradesh UV Uyghurs Vaccination Vaginal Yeast Valerie Plame Variation Vdare Venezuela Vibrancy Victor Canfield Victoria Nuland Victorian England Victorianism Video Video Games Vietnam Vietnam War Vietnamese Violence Vioxx Virginia Tech Visual Word Form Area Vitamin D Vladimir Putin Vladimir Zhirinovsky Voronezh Vote Fraud Vulcan Society W.E.I.R.D. W.E.I.R.D.O. Wall Street War War In Donbass War On Terror Warhol Washington Post WasPage Watergate Watson Watsoning Waugh Weight Loss WEIRDO Welfare Western Europe Western European Marriage Pattern Western Hypocrisy Western Media Western Religion Westerns Where's The Fallout White America White Americans White Death White Helmets White Nationalists White Privilege White Slavery White Supremacy Whites Who Is The Fairest Of Them All? Who Whom Why We Can't Have Nice Things Wikileaks Wild Life Wilhelm Furtwangler William Browder William Buckley William D. Hamilton William Graham Sumner William McGougall WINEP Winston Churchill Women Women In The Workplace Woodley Effect Woodrow Wilson WORDSUM Workers Working Class World Cup World Values Survey World War G World War I World War II World War III World War T Wretched Refuse Wretched Refuseism Writing WSJ WTF WTO WVS Xi Jinping Y Chromosome Yamnaya Yankees Yemen Yezidis Yochi Dreazen You Maniacs You Blew It Up Youtube Ban Yugoslavia Zbigniew Brzezinski Zika Zika Virus Zimbabwe Zionism Zombies
Nothing found
"Boethiuss"
Comments
• My
Comments
636 Comments • 82,200 Words •  RSS
(Commenters may request that their archives be hidden by contacting the appropriate blogger)
All Comments
 All Comments
    From the New York Times Opinion section: It’s Benjamin Netanyahu’s World Now By Anshel Pfeffer Anshel Pfeffer (@AnshelPfeffer) is a writer for Haaretz and the author of “Bibi: The Turbulent Life and Times of Benjamin Netanyahu.” May 18, 2018 Nearly every day it seems that another dream comes true for Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu:...
  • @Svigor

    Absolutely. As it pertains to us, I wish we could get over our fixation with the Jews and, where we can, do what they have done to be successful. Specifically, this means to rebuild our stores of solidarity and loyalty so that we’re able to make the same sort of moves that Israel has done. Through solidarity, we can accomplish important, useful, valuable things without even having to fight directly for them.
     
    Getting over their fixation with the goyim, and what the goyim do with their borders, and what the goyim think about nationalism, and what the goyim think about minorities, and what the goyim think about diversity...none of this strikes me as the Jewish mode of success.

    Getting over their fixation with the goyim, and what the goyim do with their borders, and what the goyim think about nationalism, and what the goyim think about minorities, and what the goyim think about diversity…none of this strikes me as the Jewish mode of success.

    ~facepalm~

    No, the Jewish mode of success is founded on their group loyalty. Not necessarily called in from Netanyahu or the powers above, but simply understood among many Jews powerful or otherwise. What I’m saying is we can do that for us instead of just feebly bitching when they do that for themselves at our expense.

    If we increase our solidarity as Americans, through the affirmations of voting for Republicans and associating with them, we could take some battles that are losing now, and win them without fighting.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Svigor

    No, the Jewish mode of success is founded on their group loyalty.
     
    True, and yet,

    Getting over their fixation with the goyim, and what the goyim do with their borders, and what the goyim think about nationalism, and what the goyim think about minorities, and what the goyim think about diversity…none of this strikes me as the Jewish mode of success.
     
    One part of getting people to start thinking like a group is to point out all the groups, how they act. Social Identity Theory; highlight the differences. Get a good rivalry going. Nurse a sense of grievance. Circle the wagons. Mobilize the fighters.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • That’s what I’ve been saying for a long time: Israel is a quite successful country, and Netanyahu has been a quite successful Israeli politician, being in and out of supreme power since 1996, 22 years ago.

    Absolutely. As it pertains to us, I wish we could get over our fixation with the Jews and, where we can, do what they have done to be successful. Specifically, this means to rebuild our stores of solidarity and loyalty so that we’re able to make the same sort of moves that Israel has done. Through solidarity, we can accomplish important, useful, valuable things without even having to fight directly for them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Svigor

    Absolutely. As it pertains to us, I wish we could get over our fixation with the Jews and, where we can, do what they have done to be successful. Specifically, this means to rebuild our stores of solidarity and loyalty so that we’re able to make the same sort of moves that Israel has done. Through solidarity, we can accomplish important, useful, valuable things without even having to fight directly for them.
     
    Getting over their fixation with the goyim, and what the goyim do with their borders, and what the goyim think about nationalism, and what the goyim think about minorities, and what the goyim think about diversity...none of this strikes me as the Jewish mode of success.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • A life well lived. It's reasonable to say that Tom Wolfe succeeded in cutting a figure in American life comparable to another white-suited, big-spending writer, Mark Twain. Indeed, I'd argue that Wolfe was near his peak for longer than Twain and on a wider variety of subjects (Twain was the master of writing about being...
  • @anon
    He was a noticer. He was all over the third rails of class and race. I was surprised he was never called out for too much truth. But it was always accurate and nuanced and people thought better.

    He was a noticer. He was all over the third rails of class and race. I was surprised he was never called out for too much truth. But it was always accurate and nuanced and people thought better.

    Yeah this. Analogous to Wolfe being the successor to Twain, and at the risk of sucking up to our host, it’s fair to say that Sailer is the successor to Wolfe.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Yeah this. Analogous to Wolfe being the successor to Twain, and at the risk of sucking up to our host, it’s fair to say that Sailer is the successor to Wolfe.
     
    Well, if he ever writes some more books, he might be.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    ... it’s fair to say that Sailer is the successor to Wolfe.
     
    He'll have to up his sartorial game.

    Not that he dresses badly now, but we're talking the equivalent of PGA level here.

    Speaking of which...

    https://espngrantland.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/450496080.jpg

    https://i.imgur.com/QXbfnjU.jpg

    http://www.drupalgenerator.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/mens-vintage-golf-clothes.jpg

    http://scoreboredsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Golf-Pants.jpg

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Unlike American Indian author Sherman Alexie who got MeTooed awhile ago but comes across, at least on the page, like a decent guy, Dominican-American Person of Color writer superstar Junot Diaz comes across as a hate-filled jerk in his prose. But mostly he's confined his hate writing toward the Current Year's designated hate objects, white...
  • @BenKenobi
    I have taken to calling this the "Kissingerian" option.

    I have taken to calling this the “Kissingerian” option.

    Yeah, somehow this was more controversial than I anticipated.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • OMG this is like Iran vs Iraq, it’s just a shame they both can’t lose.

    Read More
    • Replies: @leopard
    Disgraceful.
    , @El Dato
    Can we get Oliver North, Iran Contra, Rumsfeld Gasworks and the alleged Reaganite October Surprise in there somewhere?
    , @BenKenobi
    I have taken to calling this the "Kissingerian" option.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • In the New York Times: The Future of the American Left By David Brooks Opinion Columnist ... I would disagree with this [Bernie Sanders] agenda on pragmatic policy grounds, but at least it would be humane. It’s a positive, universalist agenda that aims at social solidarity and national cohesion — we’re all in this together....
  • This was an interesting column, especially for Brooks. I think he’s right, for the most part, about the nature of the Left, being cultural Marxist instead of plain old Marxist. There’s at least two problems with it, though, that I see:

    1. The thing Steve highlighted. The idea that Bernie could have a momentary spasm against open borders does not represent the mind of the Left. The Left, of course, is heading in the opposite direction. It’s electoral interest and cultural interest are strongly aligned toward more immigration. The expression of xenophobia on the Left is antagonism to normie America.

    2. Fundamentally, this expression of the Left is substantially weaker than Brooks is supposing. There’s a lot of Americans who aren’t enamored of Trump, or Republicans, or the alt-right, or whatever they take “our” side to be who won’t go for this, and for that matter are substantially afraid of this.

    The danger isn’t that this pov will “win”, it’s that it will hang around and pollute everything else, which is basically what’s going on now.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Now in Taki's Magazine, my book review of Jonathan Weisman's (((Semitism))): Read the
  • @Steve Sailer
    I’m basically proposing a deal, the one proposed by 1970s neocons: Jews shouldn’t persecute white gentiles for overrepresentation in good jobs relative to blacks, and gentiles shouldn’t persecute Jews for overrepresentation in the really goods jobs relative to gentiles.

    I’m basically proposing a deal, the one proposed by 1970s neocons: Jews shouldn’t persecute white gentiles for overrepresentation in good jobs relative to blacks, and gentiles shouldn’t persecute Jews for overrepresentation in the really goods jobs relative to gentiles.

    I see lots of people have chimed in already. That said, let’s stipulate that the actions to be undertaken would be good one. Even so, let me just say that you still have the same problems as you have with negotiating with terrorists: a lot of the time, there’s nobody to cut a deal with. Who does Gentile America talk to so that Seth Levy from Brooklyn knows that he shouldn’t be gratuitously trashing white Americans from Oklahoma and accusing them of racism?

    This deal may even be a good thing if it comes to exist, but to my mind it’s a significant mistake to be looking in this sort of direction. Instead we should be looking to strengthen our own solidarity above all else. That’s what will get us better terms to the extent such things are explicitly negotiated, or more likely, more resources to handle things when they’re not.

    And for that, the biggest, most comprehensive institution we have to express the solidarity of Americans for Americans is the Republican Party. For those who are more racially conscious than I am, it is the Republican Party which is most associated as the political expression of white Gentile America, not least by white Gentile Americans themselves.

    Like other occasions when the chips are down, this is a situation to be thinking more about our means than our wants.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • From the NYT: Is Stacey Abrams Assembling a New Democratic Majority? By Aimee Allison Ms. Allison is president of Democracy in Color and the author of the forthcoming “She the People.” April 30, 2018 When early voting begins today in the Georgia primary campaign for governor, Stacey Abrams, the former minority leader of the Georgia...
  • @Polynikes
    If they had any smart black politicians they would run on immigration. Popular enough with the blacks now not to hurt them and it might cut the white working class off at the knees. It would throw Republicans in disarray with no counterpoint.

    If they had any smart black politicians they would run on immigration. Popular enough with the blacks now not to hurt them and it might cut the white working class off at the knees. It would throw Republicans in disarray with no counterpoint.

    Sort of. It wouldn’t help the black pols really for the same reasons Republicans don’t support increasing welfare or minimum wage, even if it’s popular. Whatever the black pols come up with, our side would just outbid them. But even if it wouldn’t help the black pols, it would flip the issue itself in our favor. It would be an incredibly huge development if in fact it did occur.

    In a bankshot way, this is where Steve’s OP comes in. Pols like Barbara Jordan thought of themselves as black, not intersectional or multiracial, etc., etc, unlike Stacey Abrams. Maybe instead, we should try to rebrand the Democrats as Multiracial, so the blacks think they’ll be losing out (and in fact they will as things are going).

    As it stands, blacks are perfectly happy to go black-black-blackety-blackety-black-black-black for the sake of antagonizing John Derbyshire or the Dallas cops. But they’re perfectly willing to stand in line and wait their turn when it comes to Muslims, Latins, trans, whoever in the Coalition of the Fringes.

    They’re really is no good angle for us. It’s not really clear whether it’s better for the Democrats to be black or Multiracial, and it’s not clear we could pull off either one. I fear for now at least it’s a matter of nature taking its course and in a few years or so the antagonisms can be big enough to where there’s something we can do about it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Even taken with a grain of snark, Steve is making an excellent point nonetheless, especially to note that the Democrats’ rebrand isn’t merely the Black Party, but specifically the Black Women Party.

    It’s not so much that whites are cooler now in the public imagination relative to five or ten years ago, they’re about the same really. The difference is in perception of blacks. People are slow to notice the change, because of years of indoctrination about MLK, Frederick Douglass and Harriet Tubman, but there’s been a slow change nonetheless.

    “Multi-ethnic”/”mixed”/”multi-racial” still seems forward-thinking and cool, whereas “black” seems fixated on controversies and historical issues many people just might not care very much about. This is emphasized especially regarding the perception of black women vs. black men.

    Black men still have the cachet of hip-hop and NBA stars, even if it’s only a minute fraction of black men who have any legitimate connection to them. But black women are associated with low-level employees of marginally functioning government bureaucracies, and loud beefs over their immediate social situation, without the savvy cattiness that white women have.

    There’s so much drama associated with blackness: busing, slavery, crime, racism, police brutality, Jim Crow, incarceration, IQ, whatever. What people are starting to notice without as much drama, is that beyond all those things, a lot of black culture is dull, uneducated, uncultured, and uninteresting.

    The only reason why this doesn’t work, or at least hasn’t worked so far, is that the Democrats aren’t yet the Black Party, or even the Multiracial Party. At the moment, they are the White Upper-Middle Class Party. Sharpton and Jackson have been around for along time and haven’t taken over yet. When push comes to shove, the Democrats’ winnowing out process has been effective enough.

    Read More
    • Replies: @gunner29

    At the moment, they are the White Upper-Middle Class Party.
     
    This be true.

    Over the years I've read about how the Old South views negros; they hate the race, but can accept certain ones they have personal contact with.

    The White Upper-middle Class party, up north, loves the negro race, but won't have any individual interactions with negros. They are scared shitless of them. Make enough money so they can live in no negro neighborhoods, kids are in no negro schools, job is no negro, social life is no negro.

    So all the negro vibrancy they want to inflict on the rest of us, (((they))) won't get to experience!

    And it is (((they))), along with the WASP's they've colluded with.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Audacious Epigone conjures up a graph of a 2017 Reuters poll on Russia: Threat or Menace? The Jewish sample size is only 63, so take this with a grain of statistical salt. But, yeah, hysteria over Russia is, more than anything else, an old Jewish Democrat thing: Bubbe told me about the Czar and his...
  • @Beckow

    Working together they might accomplish something...That is not going to happen with Russia’s current mentality.
     
    Or with Western demonisation of Russia. So not much will be accomplished. The issue goes beyond 'cultural corruption of German government'. The open-border, multicultural policies have existed in almost all Western countries for close to a generation, if not longer. From UK to Sweden, from Canada to Netherlands.

    Regarding 'threats', can you be specific? What exactly is Russia threatening to do? Give us an actual example, who are they going to 'invade' and how. And for what purpose. You are hiding behind childish slogans, give us an example.

    Regarding ‘threats’, can you be specific? What exactly is Russia threatening to do? Give us an actual example, who are they going to ‘invade’ and how. And for what purpose. You are hiding behind childish slogans, give us an example.

    Like right here, from a few comments upthread:

    http://www.unz.com/tsaker/listening-to-russian-experts-short-report-about-the-mood-on-russian-prime-time-tv/

    Including this:

    6) To my amazement, the notion that Russia might have to sink a few USN ships or use Kalibers on US forces in the Middle-East was viewed as a real, maybe inevitable, option. Really – nobody objected.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Beckow

    they are taking an outrageously reckless risk, especially for a country like the UK
     
    And so would Russia. One cannot prove a negative, so Russia can never 'demonstrate its own innocence'. Any more than UK can. You consistently apply double standards and are basing it on your own biased views: UK good, Russia bad. That is tribal and primitive. UK has produces no evidence other than old tales, narratives from the past that are equally dubious, there has not been a single legal case brought, so maybe those old stories were also just stories.

    Who really did it, if not the Russians?
     
    I don't know if you realize how stupid that sounds to any outside observer. So anytime an Englishman gets killed around the world, it must by the UK government who did it? Are you really on that low level of reasoning? In 5 minutes anyone can come up with literally dozens of other possible explanations: Skripal was smuggling it, he mishandled it, he betrayed his new sponsors, a third country (Ukraine, France, ...) did it to get some geo-political mileage against Russia, criminal attack... Without evidence how can anyone just assert that 'Russians did it'? Don't you see how insane and infantile that is?

    And UK government and media lie often. A lot, there are endless examples, look it up.

    And so would Russia. One cannot prove a negative, so Russia can never ‘demonstrate its own innocence’. Any more than UK can. You consistently apply double standards and are basing it on your own biased views: UK good, Russia bad. That is tribal and primitive.

    This is really stupid. “Russia can’t prove a negative” is a stupid cliche. It can argue that it didn’t have the opportunity or the means to do what it’s being accused of, if in fact the circumstances would support that. Here, of course, the circumstances support the diametric opposite. The Skripals were poisoned with a Russian nerve agent. That’s not something you can simply walk into a Wal-Mart and get. Of course Russia did it.

    Forgive me for asking, but are you being dense on purpose or just taking a devil’s advocate approach regarding a presumption of innocence (or ignorance pertaining to what happened) like a defense attorney would do?

    I’m asking because you seem to want to ignore the obvious facts and patterns of this situation and talk about irrelevant side issues, eg, “there has not been a single legal case brought….” The case against Russia is circumstantial, but circumstantially, it is very strong.

    So anytime an Englishman gets killed around the world, it must by the UK government who did it?

    When a Russian, given diplomatic protection by England, gets killed in England by a Russian nerve agent whose access is very restricted, it stands to reason that the perpetrators are those who had access to the murder weapon, in this case the Russian intelligence services. Like other Russians also poisoned by Russian intelligence authorities in foreign countries.

    It seems that you are determined to remain ignorant of obvious facts in the public record that give us a very good understanding of what happened.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • West is obsessed with ‘multi-ing’ us in some way, bring in hordes of unassimilable young men from Africa, Pakistan, Middle East for us to take care of and suffer from their menacing and often criminal frustrations. Why?

    Mostly because of the cultural corruptions of the Merkel regime in Germany.

    This could be a situation where Russia’s threats are horribly counterproductive. If the US and Russia were motivated and de facto allied on the matter, the situation could be different. Russia is geographically and culturally close to Central European nations getting the squeeze from the EU. The US is diplomatically close to the nations putting on the squeeze. Working together they might accomplish something.

    That is not going to happen with Russia’s current mentality.

    Russians are not ‘invading’, they simply are not, and more you repeat it more like a bunch of crazy obsessives you sound. WWIII can easily be avoided if West just calms down and stops making up things, or making mountains out of mole-hills.

    No. Russia may not be “invading” but they clearly are threatening, and I am going to take those threats seriously not least because I believe the Russians intend us to. Russia doesn’t believe its grievances are molehills, so they are taking me along for its ride.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beckow

    Working together they might accomplish something...That is not going to happen with Russia’s current mentality.
     
    Or with Western demonisation of Russia. So not much will be accomplished. The issue goes beyond 'cultural corruption of German government'. The open-border, multicultural policies have existed in almost all Western countries for close to a generation, if not longer. From UK to Sweden, from Canada to Netherlands.

    Regarding 'threats', can you be specific? What exactly is Russia threatening to do? Give us an actual example, who are they going to 'invade' and how. And for what purpose. You are hiding behind childish slogans, give us an example.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Beckow
    Well, you present your case well. I give you credit. And yet, I have seen no evidence that Russia 'poisoned Skripals' or that they 'green-lighted Assad's chemical weapons'. With Skripals I suspect that Skripals themselves were somehow involved (lessons from British detective stories). With Assad, I simply don't care - they are fighting each other to death, all sides in Syria. Assad at least puts on a suit and has a decent (uncovered) wife, I will take that over the alternatives.

    if by some miracle Russia didn’t do these things, this would still be Russia’s problem anyway
     
    Not really, it would be a huge problem for UK and the West. Lying is not ok. UK doesn't have 'credibility', we all remember Blair and one more of the '45-minute WMD's' stories and Uk might as well pack it up, they would be laughed out of any rational society. You simply cannot lie this blatantly and this assertively. I am not an 'Anglo' and I don't think that Anglos are so special that they get to lie at will - most people feel that way. It would be a disaster. And I suspect at least with Skripals UK government lied - or over-stated its case.

    Czechs were flat out told that a road to EU requires joining NATO. Period. No love, no desire, just pragmatism. But fighting Russians goes beyond that. Why should we fight them? What exactly have they done or can do? Crimea is a disputed 'Russian speaking' territory (just as Kosovo was in Serbia), Russians have as much right to speak their language as anyone else (the Baltic quasi-apartheid states that West ignores), and 'civil war' in Syria is a mess with no good players. Why is that so important?

    On the other hand, how we live, who lives around us, who we have to take care off is hugely important. West is obsessed with 'multi-ing' us in some way, bring in hordes of unassimilable young men from Africa, Pakistan, Middle East for us to take care of and suffer from their menacing and often criminal frustrations. Why? Who the f..ck told you that we want change to something else, that just because UK has become Western Pakistan, we want the same thing? Fix you cr..p at home and then come to talk to us. And Russians are not 'invading', they simply are not, and more you repeat it more like a bunch of crazy obsessives you sound. WWIII can easily be avoided if West just calms down and stops making up things, or making mountains out of mole-hills. Get back to rationality, stop over-dramatising Russia and start taking the demographic catastrophe that you are experiencing in the West seriously. Then we might take you seriously.

    Not really, it would be a huge problem for UK and the West. Lying is not ok. UK doesn’t have ‘credibility’, we all remember Blair and one more of the ’45-minute WMD’s’ stories and Uk might as well pack it up, they would be laughed out of any rational society. You simply cannot lie this blatantly and this assertively. I am not an ‘Anglo’ and I don’t think that Anglos are so special that they get to lie at will – most people feel that way. It would be a disaster. And I suspect at least with Skripals UK government lied – or over-stated its case.

    I don’t believe this at all, and I don’t think it’s remotely credible.

    Among other things, think about this from a UK point of view. If in some way they framed Russia for poisoning the Skripals they are taking an outrageously reckless risk, especially for a country like the UK. Because, not only do they intend to falsely blame Russia, there is no way they can control all variables so that Russia would be prevented from demonstrating their innocence, if in fact she was innocent. That would be a huge diplomatic embarrassment to be caught with that sort of scheme. And given that they have “successfully” “blamed” Russia, we should have seen the payoff (for which this plot was the pretext) by now. But of course there was no payoff. All the UK has done is throw out some diplomats/spies, which they could have done for a hundred other reasons without any pretext.

    And on top of that, there is the OJ problem. Ie, the Skripals really were poisoned. Who really did it, if not the Russians?

    None of this holds any water at all. Unless we hear very convincing evidence otherwise, this was done directly by Russia’s intelligence apparatus, or by criminal elements very closely associated with it. Just like they are responsible for numerous similar incidents.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beckow

    they are taking an outrageously reckless risk, especially for a country like the UK
     
    And so would Russia. One cannot prove a negative, so Russia can never 'demonstrate its own innocence'. Any more than UK can. You consistently apply double standards and are basing it on your own biased views: UK good, Russia bad. That is tribal and primitive. UK has produces no evidence other than old tales, narratives from the past that are equally dubious, there has not been a single legal case brought, so maybe those old stories were also just stories.

    Who really did it, if not the Russians?
     
    I don't know if you realize how stupid that sounds to any outside observer. So anytime an Englishman gets killed around the world, it must by the UK government who did it? Are you really on that low level of reasoning? In 5 minutes anyone can come up with literally dozens of other possible explanations: Skripal was smuggling it, he mishandled it, he betrayed his new sponsors, a third country (Ukraine, France, ...) did it to get some geo-political mileage against Russia, criminal attack... Without evidence how can anyone just assert that 'Russians did it'? Don't you see how insane and infantile that is?

    And UK government and media lie often. A lot, there are endless examples, look it up.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • From the New York Times: Maybe what usually holds back regular women from landing the much sought-after superior man (e.g., Mr Darcy) is that, just as with women, there are a lot more regular men? Young women's lives are dominated by intra-sexual competition with other young women to capture the affections of a decent or...
  • @The preferred nomenclature is...
    My teenage son and I were lifting at our real barbell gym a couple of weekends ago. In a "miscellaneous" room (there is a prowler, kettle bells, mats, etc.) they were holding a seminar on female bikini "fitness" competitions. It was being led by a Barbie Doll, she was definitely a high 8.75 to 9.25 and an active competitor in the "sport". Her students. Yikes. Only one was in the high 7, low 8 range (and I noted she had a big rock on her married finger). The rest were 5's (that is being kind). It was unbelievable that they thought they were worthy of strutting around in a bikini being judged.

    I don't know if I should cry or if to WTF it, since at least they weren't sittin' on the couch eating Cheetos for that afternoon.

    I don’t know if I should cry or if to WTF it, since at least they weren’t sittin’ on the couch eating Cheetos for that afternoon.

    They might end up better than you think. For every “After” there is a “Before”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The preferred nomenclature is...
    Trust me I've spent a lot of time in gyms in the last 30 years. These gals were never gonna come close to the instructor's level, which is where you need to be to even compete in those kinds of competitions.

    And I never look down on any one if they are in the gym trying. Ever. Meaning trying to lose some weight, get stronger, etc. I'm just happy for folks to get off the couch and do something.

    My point was these gals were way out of their league when it came to bikini competitions.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @J.Ross

    But [Ivanka]’s got zero gravitational pull for female journalists
     
    -- who have programmatically decided to deride all things Trump, and would lose their jobs if they did otherwise.

    – who have programmatically decided to deride all things Trump, and would lose their jobs if they did otherwise.

    Yeah, this is mostly true probably, but not all of it. And it is in no way inevitable.

    It’s the sort of thing we could make some hay with if the person of Donald Trump wasn’t such a liability. In fact, we probably could anyway if Ivanka was a female Donald Trump, but for good or ill she seems considerably more normal, which makes it all the more a shame I guess.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • On the flipside of Amy Schumer (and the First Law of Female Journalism itself I’d guess) is Ivanka.

    This isn’t the only downside to the Trump Administration of course, but Ivanka has been a major disappointment nonetheless. At bottom, she is the fulfillment of what the First Law is for: she’s young, sexually attractive, probably wealthy, has a stable primary relationship and healthy children, blah blah blah. But she’s got zero gravitational pull for female journalists and their audience (who are lacking these things and strongly desirous of them).

    Even worse, she’s moving the Trump Administration against us by her own social insecurities. Like this (and there’s more where that came from):

    https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/gus-kenworthy-slams-ivanka-trumps-olympic-appearance/

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross

    But [Ivanka]’s got zero gravitational pull for female journalists
     
    -- who have programmatically decided to deride all things Trump, and would lose their jobs if they did otherwise.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Audacious Epigone conjures up a graph of a 2017 Reuters poll on Russia: Threat or Menace? The Jewish sample size is only 63, so take this with a grain of statistical salt. But, yeah, hysteria over Russia is, more than anything else, an old Jewish Democrat thing: Bubbe told me about the Czar and his...
  • And one last thing for today. Just for emphasis in case it wasn’t clear before, given the new Administration in Washington, I personally would like to have an informal coalition of Russia/US/Central Europe/Eastern Europe regarding immigration/cultural issues/sexual issues against basically Germany/Soros/whoever.

    But, given Russia’s actions of last week, it’s clear that in the short term at least that’s not in the cards.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beckow

    informal coalition of Russia/US/Central Europe/Eastern Europe regarding immigration/cultural issues/sexual issues against basically Germany/Soros/whoever
     
    Well, it is hard to have a coalition, informal or of any kind, when on side obsessively demonises its potential allies. It just doesn't work. Way before last week's excitement, it was obvious that the 'Soros/whoever' forces in the West are effectively in charge. When Trump get s his own house in order, then you can think about coalitions.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Beckow
    It is obviously impossible for us to come to an agreement, I don't worry much about 'pissed off' diplomats or Tier 1 confrontations. In general a country that goes on is 'succeeding' on its own terms, Russia is there, will be there, they seem to live just fine.

    The preachy, self-centered, narcissistic condescension that you display here, with a touch of lazy thinking, is hurting West. It is a sign of weakness, you don't seem to be ale to argue actual points so you escape into high-falluting slogans and dismissive patronising. It is not working.

    Regarding the Tier 1 confrontation (yes, ugly and yet in a remote, non-real way that didn't touch that many people): why are we having it? Who has shown the endless initiatives to 'fix' Syria, 'liberate' Ukraine, put a base here or there, who has run a media demonisation campaign of almost Jesuit ferocity? Who are the real meddlers here? If you ask a normal guy on the street in Central Europe, it is not even close - he sees the frantic activity, the media manipulation, over-flying planes, the hectoring on TV - and guess what, almost all of it is from Brussels, Washington, London. Russia is invisible here, nobody cares, nobody sees them, they seem to be minding their own business.

    Then a bunch of Merkel migrant goons attack people on the street and people know what the real danger is. You are dreaming if you think that is not a #1 issue, you must not get out much. I guess you are too busy putting the world in 'Tiers'.

    Regarding the Tier 1 confrontation (yes, ugly and yet in a remote, non-real way that didn’t touch that many people): why are we having it?

    For this latest business, this is Russia’s fault. Nobody forced them to poison the Skripals, and nobody forced them to greenlight Assad using chemical agents in Syria, and yes, Russia did both here. The evidence and basic inference indicates that, and Russia’s online army of sycophants and propagandists (and I’m not saying that you’re one of them) who can’t do anything but say “False flag, false flag!” aren’t convincing either.

    But even if by some miracle Russia didn’t do these things, this would still be Russia’s problem anyway. This is what the diplomatic process is for. The representatives of various nations talk to each other, threaten, negotiate, persuade, educate, etc., etc. Russia seems to believe the whole process is an elaborate swindle against Russia’s interests, but that’s garbage. What is true, is that in the case of the Skripals, is that in addition to the evidence against Russia that the UK has much more credibility for square dealing so that as a consequence other countries believe them. There can’t be anybody else to blame but Russia for this.

    Who has shown the endless initiatives to ‘fix’ Syria, ‘liberate’ Ukraine, put a base here or there, who has run a media demonisation campaign of almost Jesuit ferocity?

    Those things happen, at least to a substantial extent, because the American presence is needed to guarantee peace in situations that wouldn’t have it otherwise. Why are the Czechs in NATO? It does nothing for American security, if it doesn’t do anything for the Czechs either they should leave. Why are there 30 thousand American troops in South Korea? Same there. The Filipinos didn’t get enough money to have an American naval base in the Philippines. Guess what, now we don’t have one.

    We are in these various places because people who are living in those regions understand perfectly well enough that things will be very very bad for them if the Kims and the Assads get to do what they want. If it were up to me, I’d just as soon a bunch of them could return home.

    Then a bunch of Merkel migrant goons attack people on the street and people know what the real danger is. You are dreaming if you think that is not a #1 issue, you must not get out much. I guess you are too busy putting the world in ‘Tiers’.

    I was trying to be precise with that. I should have just wrote WWIII my one of the earlier comments, that might have avoided some confusion. Ie, I’m not saying that Central Europe is supposed to think that the migrations are less important than Syria. I completely don’t believe that. I do hope the migrations and the political maneuvering surrounding the migrations are resolved in your favor. But it is fair to think that the migrations are less important than WWIII, if it comes to that. I’d even venture that holds for the Czechs as well. If we do have a US/Russia based WWIII, the fallout would affect so many people in so many negative ways, so as to be more important than the migrations, as crucial as they are.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Beckow
    You are too binary without any real understanding. Most people here (almost all) like EU, see Nato as a necessary evil (joining Nato was a prerequisite to be accepted to EU, not a choice), would like friendly relations with both West and Russia, would like trade with both. Our Russian trade is very profitable and we get 90% of our energy from Russia, LNG is about 2-3 times more expensive and we don't have ports to handle it. Most people could care less about Washington's obsessive global domination, who rules East Ghouta or what sh..head steals in Iraq.

    The real danger - an imminent danger - has been the insane German-EU-Merkel policy of inviting millions of Third World migrants and then insisting that they must be distributed all over EU. That is real, it is tangible, and it has turned a lot of people against EU and West in general.

    Finally, I hate to disappoint you but Havel was a fake. He was a poor writer and even worse ceremonial president. His popularity was in low double digits and his frequent idiotic pronouncements were mostly ignored. He ended his career at some think tank outside of Washington. His plays are literally retarded, try to watch one. He had no education and was just a rich kid from a well connected family that collaborated with Nazis during WWII. He was a fake as so many people that West has built up to serve their goals.

    The real danger – an imminent danger – has been the insane German-EU-Merkel policy of inviting millions of Third World migrants and then insisting that they must be distributed all over EU. That is real, it is tangible, and it has turned a lot of people against EU and West in general.

    I would have been inclined to agree with you not very long ago, but the events of this last week are a cause for recalculation. The propensity for Tier 1 military confrontation is a bigger problem than that, even for the Czechs I’d venture. Obviously we can hope for the immediate threat to dissipate, at which point the migrations would return to the fore.

    But for us, though, it’s still a problem because it shows, in a very bad way, where Putin’s head is at, and by extension Russia’s belief in its own prospects, or lack of it.

    It’s not so much that a world without Russia isn’t worth having, as much as the perception that Russia has no hope at all of succeeding on conventional terms, and therefore will flail about desperately in hope of reshuffling the deck in some otherwise unforseen radical way, or to least to assert some kind of national honor if it can’t succeed at anything else.

    As it stands, Russia is pissing off some very important people whose goodwill it will want at some later date. And I’m not talking about the United States Deep State. Basically Russia has pissed off the diplomatic corps of the entire Western world, including and especially your EU buddies. And the idea that that is acceptable tradeoff in order to control a port in Syria, betrays the thought process of somebody who has some very profound misunderstandings of how the world works nowadays.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Beckow

    For the things we’re supposed to like about Putin and Russia, he’s not doing anything meaningful to help.
     
    It is none of their business, why should they do anything? Although, if one listens to Western politicians and media, Putin is behind all nationalist-populist groups and has been 'meddling' until he is blue in the face to promote the likes of Trump, La Pen, Orban, Brexit. So who knows, maybe he is 'doing something', you can't have it both ways.

    My country is Czech Rep and Slovakia - the real Central Europe (I am sorry but Estonia-Latvia are Eastern Europe). Nobody here gives a sh.t about the 'Russian menace', you are being fed very shallow propaganda that has no relation to how majority of people think. They are not coming, they are not invading - but a bunch of Merkel migrants often pop across the border and do their thing, mayhem, stealing, etc... And EU is suing us to force refugees to be relocated here. I think Hungarians feel the same way as we do, I am not sure about Poland they are too emotional to read.

    'US-friendly' doesn't mean that we hate those who you hate. We are just friendly in general, but don't abuse the privilege. And you seem to have an obvious double standard about the nukes - read what you said before, when A does it, it is beyond pale. But when B does it, it doesn't matter because, as you say 'nobody is anticipating a nuclear escalation from US'. Right. Nobody is, you know that. Check out the Hiroshima thing.

    My country is Czech Rep and Slovakia – the real Central Europe (I am sorry but Estonia-Latvia are Eastern Europe). Nobody here gives a sh.t about the ‘Russian menace‘, you are being fed very shallow propaganda that has no relation to how majority of people think. They are not coming, they are not invading – but a bunch of Merkel migrants often pop across the border and do their thing, mayhem, stealing, etc… And EU is suing us to force refugees to be relocated here. I think Hungarians feel the same way as we do, I am not sure about Poland they are too emotional to read.

    I wasn’t intending to say that the Baltic nations are in Central Europe, just that part of the world tends to be US friendly.

    In any event, maybe you should elaborate on how Czech politics fits in here (or other nearby nations as well to the extent you feel knowledgeable enough to comment on them).

    As far as I know, the Czech Republic and similarly situated countries are looking toward their NATO membership to provide for their security, and EU membership for economic development. If these things aren’t true, then I am substantially mistaken. Certainly the expansion of NATO membership does nothing for American security except through its intention to further the peace in that region. Lots of Presidents have criticized our allies for lack of funding toward their security commitments, most notably Donald Trump a couple of months ago.

    These are the defining features of orientation for the Czech Republic and similar countries since the end of the Cold War. If you have a different perspective on this, I’d be very interested in hearing it. For me at least, this was pretty clear, and if anything more clear with respect to the EU even than with NATO.

    Because in spite of all the antagonism from Merkel, Germany, and the migrant-friendly elements of the EU, the Czech Republic is still firmly oriented toward the EU anyway. It knows, or at least it perceives, that its economic development depends on closer association with the wealthier nations of the EU instead of the economically backward economy of Russia. Even though the current migration threatens Czech sovereignty and cultural integrity, the Czechs are strongly motivated to resist those things within the context of the EU.

    Maybe this just has to do with the fact that for Americans, Vaclav Havel was by far the most prominent Czech perspective for at least a decade, but I suspect it goes beyond that as well.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beckow
    You are too binary without any real understanding. Most people here (almost all) like EU, see Nato as a necessary evil (joining Nato was a prerequisite to be accepted to EU, not a choice), would like friendly relations with both West and Russia, would like trade with both. Our Russian trade is very profitable and we get 90% of our energy from Russia, LNG is about 2-3 times more expensive and we don't have ports to handle it. Most people could care less about Washington's obsessive global domination, who rules East Ghouta or what sh..head steals in Iraq.

    The real danger - an imminent danger - has been the insane German-EU-Merkel policy of inviting millions of Third World migrants and then insisting that they must be distributed all over EU. That is real, it is tangible, and it has turned a lot of people against EU and West in general.

    Finally, I hate to disappoint you but Havel was a fake. He was a poor writer and even worse ceremonial president. His popularity was in low double digits and his frequent idiotic pronouncements were mostly ignored. He ended his career at some think tank outside of Washington. His plays are literally retarded, try to watch one. He had no education and was just a rich kid from a well connected family that collaborated with Nazis during WWII. He was a fake as so many people that West has built up to serve their goals.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Beckow
    I don't get your point. When people point out to you that Russia's position on nuclear weapons is comparable to US or UK, you chaotically try to avoid it by using silly words like 'different animal', 'not the point', instead of rationally addressing it. You give us:

    Assad did use chemical weapons
     
    Did he? Did the jihadists use them? You simply don't know. And don't sneakily add 'Assad used again' like a desperate car salesman following a sales pitch. Then you decide for us what matters and what doesn't (Hitler is not relevant, but Bolsheviks' misdeeds are very relevant; right). I am a 'Central European' and nobody with a triple digit IQ here worries about 'control by Russia', we worry about keeping what we have, staying white and European unlike our Western neighbours. Your Russian bugaboo plays only for those who are getting paid to say it. It is not a day-to-day concern for normal people. 100 million angry Africans trying to break into Europe is.

    Nobody can take this meandering nonsense seriously. What happened to education in the West? Rules of logic, attention to detail, rationality? It often seems West is mostly represented by lawyerly types who are advocates and not interested in truth. This will not end well.

    When people point out to you that Russia’s position on nuclear weapons is comparable to US or UK, you chaotically try to avoid it by using silly words like ‘different animal’, ‘not the point’, instead of rationally addressing it.

    What are you talking about, I did address it. I haven’t read the Review and I don’t know what’s in it, but it doesn’t matter. I can promise you that nobody is anticipating nuclear escalation from the United States, either because of the Review or any other reason. The world would look a lot different if it did.

    I am a ‘Central European’ and nobody with a triple digit IQ here worries about ‘control by Russia’, we worry about keeping what we have, staying white and European unlike our Western neighbours. Your Russian bugaboo plays only for those who are getting paid to say it.

    What’s your home country then? I can tell you that if it’s Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Hungary, Poland, Czech Republic, or maybe a couple others, their politics are firmly determined to assert operational independence from Russia. They are among the most US-friendly countries on earth, and it’s not because we’re paying anybody.

    It is true that, culturally speaking, regarding the public presence of Christianity, immigration, and sexuality, Russian and Putin are closer than the major EU powers. But that’s not really helping anything. In fact, that’s one of the big takeaways of this last episode. In the abstract, it’s nice that Russia is opposing the immigration of Middle Eastern/North African refugees/migrants/whatever. But it’s not doing anything meaningful to stop Merkel from doing her thing. Maybe that’s not his problem. But what is clear, is that it’s business as usual for plain old Russian aggressive land-grab politics/military invasion/subversion/whatever.

    For the things we’re supposed to like about Putin and Russia, he’s not doing anything meaningful to help.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beckow

    For the things we’re supposed to like about Putin and Russia, he’s not doing anything meaningful to help.
     
    It is none of their business, why should they do anything? Although, if one listens to Western politicians and media, Putin is behind all nationalist-populist groups and has been 'meddling' until he is blue in the face to promote the likes of Trump, La Pen, Orban, Brexit. So who knows, maybe he is 'doing something', you can't have it both ways.

    My country is Czech Rep and Slovakia - the real Central Europe (I am sorry but Estonia-Latvia are Eastern Europe). Nobody here gives a sh.t about the 'Russian menace', you are being fed very shallow propaganda that has no relation to how majority of people think. They are not coming, they are not invading - but a bunch of Merkel migrants often pop across the border and do their thing, mayhem, stealing, etc... And EU is suing us to force refugees to be relocated here. I think Hungarians feel the same way as we do, I am not sure about Poland they are too emotional to read.

    'US-friendly' doesn't mean that we hate those who you hate. We are just friendly in general, but don't abuse the privilege. And you seem to have an obvious double standard about the nukes - read what you said before, when A does it, it is beyond pale. But when B does it, it doesn't matter because, as you say 'nobody is anticipating a nuclear escalation from US'. Right. Nobody is, you know that. Check out the Hiroshima thing.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Check the most recent Nuclear Posture Review of the United States, which contemplates use of nuclear weapons in a far wider range of scenarios, including use against Russia, than had previously been the case.

    Russia is well within its rights to warn aggressive nations such as the United States, France and the U.K., that it reserves the right to attack the floating or fixed locations from which their aggression against Russia’s Syrian ally is being launched. It’s the fault of the aggressor if that carries the possibiity of escalation to nuclear exchange, not the nation responding to it.

    No no no. The Review can “contemplate” whatever. That’s a much different animal that saying we’re going to use them next week against an adversary we’re not at war with. And this is about something, let’s recall, where on the matter itself we’re right and Russia is wrong. Assad did use chemical weapons, and that is a bad thing that needs some kind of international response, as weak as it was.

    Yeah I mean, I get that we’re not neocons and all, but just in terms of sheer bullshit excuse-making, this is less credible than anything the Israeli apologists come up with.

    The status quo ante was already favorable enough toward the Russians. There was no meaningful accountability for the crimes of the communists. And since the fall of communism, the international community holds its nose regarding things like Chechnya, extraterritorial murder, journalist murder, selling nukes to Iran, and a lotta lotta crap that Russia pulls just because its too big throw out of the G7 or whatever for small change.

    Well we can’t give in on this. If push comes to shove we can give in on Syria, but we can’t give in regarding the taboo against direct Tier 1 warfare in the Nuclear Era. There’s just too many important things tied into that.

    The plain reality is that the Russia is much weaker nation economically, culturally, and demographically, than her national ego demands for herself. Unfortunately, that’s just part of reality and it has nothing to do with Syria or aggressive US foreign policy. And somehow Russia has to find a way to come to terms with that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beckow
    I don't get your point. When people point out to you that Russia's position on nuclear weapons is comparable to US or UK, you chaotically try to avoid it by using silly words like 'different animal', 'not the point', instead of rationally addressing it. You give us:

    Assad did use chemical weapons
     
    Did he? Did the jihadists use them? You simply don't know. And don't sneakily add 'Assad used again' like a desperate car salesman following a sales pitch. Then you decide for us what matters and what doesn't (Hitler is not relevant, but Bolsheviks' misdeeds are very relevant; right). I am a 'Central European' and nobody with a triple digit IQ here worries about 'control by Russia', we worry about keeping what we have, staying white and European unlike our Western neighbours. Your Russian bugaboo plays only for those who are getting paid to say it. It is not a day-to-day concern for normal people. 100 million angry Africans trying to break into Europe is.

    Nobody can take this meandering nonsense seriously. What happened to education in the West? Rules of logic, attention to detail, rationality? It often seems West is mostly represented by lawyerly types who are advocates and not interested in truth. This will not end well.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Beckow

    Nobody wants to invade Russia
     
    And there lies a lie at the heart of this issue. Of course there are people in the West who would like to take over and dismember Russia. And many are close to power and very influential. They said so in their books (Brzezinski, Allbright,...), but most important they act as if they were preparing an attack, surrounding Russia with bases, 'defensive' missiles, demonising Russia, trying to block it economically. The regular people in the West don't want to invade Russia or anyone else, yet it happens with regularity that is almost predictable. Let me remind you that the West has invaded Russia about half a dozen times in the last 300 hundred years. It is just too tempting, some would like to try again.

    they are ontologically a different country (and a worse one) for having done that
     
    The only country that have used nuclear weapons is ? Can you tell us? Russia says that they will use nukes to prevent being overrun, as Putin said that 'world without Russia is not worth it'. I suspect that is the doctrine of all other nuclear states. Do you think that US would not use nukes to prevent being defeated on its own territory? They are all the same, and what they say makes sense. Nukes are a tool of last resort, but they are in that sense like any other tool. Your moralising is silly.

    And there lies a lie at the heart of this issue. Of course there are people in the West who would like to take over and dismember Russia. And many are close to power and very influential. They said so in their books (Brzezinski, Allbright,…), but most important they act as if they were preparing an attack, surrounding Russia with bases, ‘defensive’ missiles, demonising Russia, trying to block it economically. The regular people in the West don’t want to invade Russia or anyone else, yet it happens with regularity that is almost predictable. Let me remind you that the West has invaded Russia about half a dozen times in the last 300 hundred years. It is just too tempting, some would like to try again.

    That sounds like a good story, but to be honest I suspect the Russians don’t even believe it themselves (though they like to tell whoever will listen).

    The reality is, Russia likes to think of itself as the hegemonic power for all white people in Central Europe, Eastern Europe and North Asia. That could work except for the fact that the prime motivation for white people in Central Europe and Eastern Europe who aren’t Russian is to avoid control by Russia.

    The Napoleonic Wars are irrelevant in modern European geopolitics. But, the Famines, the Purges, Katyn Forest, the Cold War satellite states, Chechnya, all those things are very relevant.

    The situation is further exacerbated by the fact that the Central European Warsaw Pact states and the Baltic states are significant more economically advanced than Russia and just generally nicer places.

    Of course, all of this is fairly well known. And the inevitable problems that occur as a consequence can be handled well enough, for Russia, for Central Europe, for us, as long as Russia respects the basic dynamics of military conflict between Tier 1 armies in the Nuclear Era. If they don’t, the world is fundamentally a much different place and we have to adapt to that.

    We can go on and on about neocons, Israel, the predatory movement of capital, blah, blah, blah. But for whatever problems those things cause, they are really not at fault here.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Silva
    I don't associate "all options on the table" with Russia - do you understand what that means?

    https://brilliantmaps.com/threat-to-peace/

    (Accepting the understandable-if-technically-wrong bias of picking whoever is the biggest threat to oneself, the Anglophones are all crazy, because Australia's the one that could quite understandably pick someone *other* than the US.)

    I don’t associate “all options on the table” with Russia – do you understand what that means?

    You keep using that word. I don’t think it means what you think it means.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @J.Ross
    Oh, it's you, helping me to know what a physicist feels when someone talks about free energy.

    Oh, it’s you, helping me to know what a physicist feels when someone talks about free energy.

    LOL.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anon
    The Russians are bluffing. They know they're bluffing. They've paid close attention to Trump's style and have noticed that Trump bluffs a lot, so they've adjusted accordingly and are trying to use his own tactics against him to pressure him.

    There does however, appear to be some serious nonsense going on between Theresa May and Putin, and May appears to be a really scheming and underhanded individual. The poisoning episode is beginning to look more and more like the work of the UK. The British have lied about the events of the poisoning so many times that their behavior is becoming much too suspicious. There is an old rule of law that goes, you don't lie in a murder case. It's too important unless you're the murderer.

    The Russians are bluffing. They know they’re bluffing. They’ve paid close attention to Trump’s style and have noticed that Trump bluffs a lot, so they’ve adjusted accordingly and are trying to use his own tactics against him to pressure him.

    God I hope so. But even as a bluff this still sucks, for exactly the reason you mentioned at the end of your comment.

    I suspect the embarrassing thing for Russia is, whatever its problems with the UK are, they have to be sorted out with the UK. Somewhere in the recesses of Putin’s brain, and certainly in the imagination of a lot of Russians, there’s the idea that Trump orders Theresa May around about the same as he does Hope Hicks when she was working at the White House.

    The unfortunately reality for Russia is that in most important ways Russia compares unfavorably to the UK, which itself is a second tier version of the US. For a prideful nation like Russia and a prideful person like Putin, that’s gotta hurt.

    I kinda want to feel sorry for him, but not really. I wouldn’t really care about the various nasties that Putin tends to do, as long as he’s willing to respect the big-picture balance of power. But the point of this latest episode is that we cannot take that for granted like we might have beforehand. So now I care quite a bit.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Beckow

    Russia seems to think its nukes constitute a license to threaten and intimidate major powers, going against some pretty basic principles of the projection of military power
     
    That is incoherent. Nukes are weapons - all weapons are used to threaten and intimidate. The easiest way to avoid a nuclear conflict is to not provoke to destroy Russia and its allies. They don't have to fight the way you want them to, they can simply decide to go for the jugular. Why not? Russia has made it clear that it will not fight another bloody, defensive war on its own territory - as they did in WWII and against Napoleon. And they don't want to capitulate. That really just leaves the nukes.

    If you don't think that at least some in the West have been pursuing a policy to encircle and eventually dismember Russia, it is pointless to have this discussion because you are either a lier or living a lie. If we have a nuclear war it will because too many in the West refuse to see reality.

    The easiest way to avoid a nuclear conflict is to not provoke to destroy Russia and its allies. They don’t have to fight the way you want them to, they can simply decide to go for the jugular. Why not? Russia has made it clear that it will not fight another bloody, defensive war on its own territory – as they did in WWII and against Napoleon. And they don’t want to capitulate. That really just leaves the nukes.

    Yeah, that’s just stupid. Nobody wants to invade Russia.

    It is possible for Russia to say (or actually believe for that matter) that it’s perfectly acceptable to use its nukes to escalate conflicts with other major nations, including other nuclear powers. It just means they are ontologically a different country (and a worse one) for having done that.

    Just like per capita IQ, GDP, level of education, social development, etc., makes Haiti an ontologically different country than Norway.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beckow

    Nobody wants to invade Russia
     
    And there lies a lie at the heart of this issue. Of course there are people in the West who would like to take over and dismember Russia. And many are close to power and very influential. They said so in their books (Brzezinski, Allbright,...), but most important they act as if they were preparing an attack, surrounding Russia with bases, 'defensive' missiles, demonising Russia, trying to block it economically. The regular people in the West don't want to invade Russia or anyone else, yet it happens with regularity that is almost predictable. Let me remind you that the West has invaded Russia about half a dozen times in the last 300 hundred years. It is just too tempting, some would like to try again.

    they are ontologically a different country (and a worse one) for having done that
     
    The only country that have used nuclear weapons is ? Can you tell us? Russia says that they will use nukes to prevent being overrun, as Putin said that 'world without Russia is not worth it'. I suspect that is the doctrine of all other nuclear states. Do you think that US would not use nukes to prevent being defeated on its own territory? They are all the same, and what they say makes sense. Nukes are a tool of last resort, but they are in that sense like any other tool. Your moralising is silly.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mr. Anon

    Like I wrote upthread, the point of having nuclear weapons is have them, not to use them.
     
    The point of having them is to (implicitly) threaten to use them. Otherwise, they mean nothing. Russia implicity threatens us. We implicitly threaten them. This has been the situation since 1949. There is nothing new in any of this.

    The point of having them is to (implicitly) threaten to use them. Otherwise, they mean nothing. Russia implicity threatens us. We implicitly threaten them. This has been the situation since 1949. There is nothing new in any of this.

    In terms of practical military use, nukes really don’t mean very much. They really can’t even be used to threaten anything meaningful, since it’s embarrassing to issue threats that you can’t fulfill.

    They are excellent as weapons of last resort for major nation-states, particularly in terms of the signaling value as a major nation-state. They are surprisingly ineffective for everything else.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mr. Anon

    Really? All the names I can think of since Krushchev are ethnically Russian....
     
    Which tends to support Anon's first point. From Krushchev on, the Soviet leadership was quite a bit less profligate with the lives of their own citizens.

    Which tends to support Anon’s first point. From Krushchev on, the Soviet leadership was quite a bit less profligate with the lives of their own citizens.

    Well yeah, but look at where the bar was set.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anon
    I notice that the Soviet Union became a lot less murderous towards its own native Russians when the native Russians took over the leadership of the country again. In fact, the totalitarian government fell apart completely when the Russians took over. This was not an accident. Tribal thinking tells you, don't screw your own people and destroy your kin. Yes, most of the original leadership of the Soviet communist movement were Jewish. You can look it up.

    I notice that the Soviet Union became a lot less murderous towards its own native Russians when the native Russians took over the leadership of the country again. In fact, the totalitarian government fell apart completely when the Russians took over. This was not an accident.

    Really? All the names I can think of since Krushchev are ethnically Russian (except Chernenko I guess if you want to be technical) and I can’t think of any offhand who were Jewish. In any event, even if we stipulate that your line of argument is true, it doesn’t necessarily imply very much, considering that it would be very difficult to beat the Great Famine in terms of numbers for mass murder.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon

    Really? All the names I can think of since Krushchev are ethnically Russian....
     
    Which tends to support Anon's first point. From Krushchev on, the Soviet leadership was quite a bit less profligate with the lives of their own citizens.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @istevefan
    Well I noticed you did not comment on the article I included in that comment. Apparently the Ukrainians were able to differentiate where you cannot.

    Well I noticed you did not comment on the article I included in that comment. Apparently the Ukrainians were able to differentiate where you cannot.

    Why would I? This sort of thing sucks up way too much time as it is, why would you be expecting me to be commenting at other venues?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @istevefan

    It should be clear that a minimum this represents a more direct, more immediate threat against us no matter what Saudi Arabia might do.
     
    No it is not. The US can easily avoid such a confrontation. We have no vital national interests in Syria. Our interference in the middle east over the past decade and a half has helped contribute to the islamic conquest of Europe. Our policies are boomeranging onto our historic mother continent to the delight of the Saudis.

    Each day the islamic conquest of Europe, which Saudi Arabia is supporting, continues virtually unabated. And to a lesser extent it continues int he US as well. America now has more muslims than we did prior to 9-11. Our mother country's capital is rapidly becoming islamic.

    We are messing around playing the Great Game like it is 1914 while our nation and our mother continent are being overrun. The stupidity of that is unreal.

    No it is not. The US can easily avoid such a confrontation. We have no vital national interests in Syria.

    I thought so too until last week, but now that doesn’t fly any more.

    Like I wrote upthread, the point of having nuclear weapons is have them, not to use them. Not only is that the rule, more importantly is has to be the rule. There’s too many interactions and points of conflict to where we would have all been incinerated a long time ago if it were acceptable to use nukes like they were bigger versions of tanks and mortars.

    Therefore, this latest episode represents a profound reorientation of world affairs that really doesn’t have anything to do with the particulars of Syria. By demonstrating its willingness to use nukes or at least threaten them, Russia is telling us profoundly important things about how it sees itself in the world and how it wants to relate to other nations.

    Basically, it wants to treat us as a bigger version of Estonia. Obviously we’re too far away to actually invade but Russia seems to think its nukes constitute a license to threaten and intimidate major powers, going against some pretty basic principles of the projection of military power. It should be pretty clear that’s not going to fly. It’s not going to fly for us obviously, but it’s just as much a nonstarter for the UK, France, Germany, Canada and Australia (which I actually suspect is a lot the problem bugging Russia). In any event, the role of Syria here is ancillary. We can’t avoid the problem simply by changing policy in Syria. If it wasn’t there it’d be somewhere else.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beckow

    Russia seems to think its nukes constitute a license to threaten and intimidate major powers, going against some pretty basic principles of the projection of military power
     
    That is incoherent. Nukes are weapons - all weapons are used to threaten and intimidate. The easiest way to avoid a nuclear conflict is to not provoke to destroy Russia and its allies. They don't have to fight the way you want them to, they can simply decide to go for the jugular. Why not? Russia has made it clear that it will not fight another bloody, defensive war on its own territory - as they did in WWII and against Napoleon. And they don't want to capitulate. That really just leaves the nukes.

    If you don't think that at least some in the West have been pursuing a policy to encircle and eventually dismember Russia, it is pointless to have this discussion because you are either a lier or living a lie. If we have a nuclear war it will because too many in the West refuse to see reality.

    , @Silva
    I don't associate "all options on the table" with Russia - do you understand what that means?

    https://brilliantmaps.com/threat-to-peace/

    (Accepting the understandable-if-technically-wrong bias of picking whoever is the biggest threat to oneself, the Anglophones are all crazy, because Australia's the one that could quite understandably pick someone *other* than the US.)
    , @Mr. Anon

    Like I wrote upthread, the point of having nuclear weapons is have them, not to use them.
     
    The point of having them is to (implicitly) threaten to use them. Otherwise, they mean nothing. Russia implicity threatens us. We implicitly threaten them. This has been the situation since 1949. There is nothing new in any of this.
    , @Diversity Heretic
    Check the most recent Nuclear Posture Review of the United States, which contemplates use of nuclear weapons in a far wider range of scenarios, including use against Russia, than had previously been the case.

    Russia is well within its rights to warn aggressive nations such as the United States, France and the U.K., that it reserves the right to attack the floating or fixed locations from which their aggression against Russia's Syrian ally is being launched. It's the fault of the aggressor if that carries the possibiity of escalation to nuclear exchange, not the nation responding to it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @istevefan

    Russian cruelty against its near neighbors is well know. Certainly Ukraine hasn’t forgot about the Great Famine, long after the Cossack pogroms against the Jews.
     
    First, the Holodomor was conducted when Stalin, a Georgian, was the ruler of the USSR.

    Second, it was carried out to a large extent by Lazar Kaganovich, who was most certainly not a Russian.

    Third, Ukraine has not forgotten about the Holodmor. In fact they ran afoul of some groups in 2009, when they tried to bring charges against the dead perpetrators:


    KIEV, Ukraine (JTA) — A Jewish group in Ukraine is objecting to a criminal case brought over the "Great Famine" committed in the 1930s.

    The nation’s security service is pressing the case against a list of former Soviet officials accused of committing the Holodomor, which caused the deaths of millions in Ukraine in 1932-33. Most of the names on the list were Jewish.

    Ukrainian lawmaker Aleksandr Feldman, leader of the Ukrainian Jewish Committee, said last week that it was "a farce" to press the case.

    “All organizers of the Great Famine are dead," he said.

    Last July, the Ukrainian Security Service released a list of high-ranking Soviet state and Communist Party officials — as well as officials from NKVD, the police force of Soviet Russia — that essentially blamed Jews and Latvians responsible for perpetrating and executing the famine because most of the names on the list were Jewish.

    The Ukrainian Jewish Committee called on the secret service to revise the list, which incited interethnic hatred, in order to clear up the “inaccuracy.”

    Feldman believes there is a danger that the “Holodomor Affair” materials are being used for political purposes.

    In late May, security service head Valentin Nalivaychenko claimed at a meeting with representatives of the World Congress of Ukrainians that “Ukraine has collected enough evidence to bring a criminal case regarding the famine, which was artificially created by the Bolshevik regime and caused mass death of citizens.”

    Through the World Congress of Ukrainians, Nalivaychenko turned to leading foreign lawyers with a request to help find out the circumstances connected with preparing and committing the genocide.

     

    First, the Holodomor was conducted when Stalin, a Georgian, was the ruler of the USSR.

    Second, it was carried out to a large extent by Lazar Kaganovich, who was most certainly not a Russian.

    LOL. I’m sure I should have heard that one before, but I haven’t. Stalin, Kaganovich et al, were the political leadership of the USSR, ie, Russia at that time and were only notable in that capacity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @istevefan
    Well I noticed you did not comment on the article I included in that comment. Apparently the Ukrainians were able to differentiate where you cannot.
    , @Anon
    I notice that the Soviet Union became a lot less murderous towards its own native Russians when the native Russians took over the leadership of the country again. In fact, the totalitarian government fell apart completely when the Russians took over. This was not an accident. Tribal thinking tells you, don't screw your own people and destroy your kin. Yes, most of the original leadership of the Soviet communist movement were Jewish. You can look it up.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @istevefan

    Apparently Israel doesn’t. I supposed you can say that Russia’s culture is less gratuitously cruel than Saudi Arabia’s, but Saudi Arabia isn’t threatening to nuke us. So that changes things.
     
    First, where the heck are you getting the notion that Russia is threatening to nuke us?

    Second, Saudi Arabia already attacked us on 9-11.

    Third, since 9-11 Saudi Arabia has been funding the sunni colonization of Europe and to a lesser extent the US.

    Fourth, Israel not caring about Europe or the US becoming more islamic is telling.

    First, where the heck are you getting the notion that Russia is threatening to nuke us?

    Like right here, at unz, among other places:

    http://www.unz.com/tsaker/listening-to-russian-experts-short-report-about-the-mood-on-russian-prime-time-tv/

    Note this lovely little paragraph near the end:

    6) To my amazement, the notion that Russia might have to sink a few USN ships or use Kalibers on US forces in the Middle-East was viewed as a real, maybe inevitable, option. Really – nobody objected.

    To be honest, I don’t know who The Saker his, I don’t really care or blame him for that matter. It’s simply important to mention that this is what the Russians are thinking, and moreover want us to know they are thinking.

    It should be clear that a minimum this represents a more direct, more immediate threat against us no matter what Saudi Arabia might do.

    Read More
    • Replies: @istevefan

    It should be clear that a minimum this represents a more direct, more immediate threat against us no matter what Saudi Arabia might do.
     
    No it is not. The US can easily avoid such a confrontation. We have no vital national interests in Syria. Our interference in the middle east over the past decade and a half has helped contribute to the islamic conquest of Europe. Our policies are boomeranging onto our historic mother continent to the delight of the Saudis.

    Each day the islamic conquest of Europe, which Saudi Arabia is supporting, continues virtually unabated. And to a lesser extent it continues int he US as well. America now has more muslims than we did prior to 9-11. Our mother country's capital is rapidly becoming islamic.

    We are messing around playing the Great Game like it is 1914 while our nation and our mother continent are being overrun. The stupidity of that is unreal.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @J.Ross
    Almost nothing (unless the pipeline idea is true, in which case "nothing, plus a pipeline"). Those are all examples of highly aggressive and invasive Western attacks on Russia, where Russia is struggling to claw back its status quo, and not take new territory or encroach on ours. The fact that they are discussed as though they were Putin projects originating from whole cloth in the Kremlin is itself propagandistic delusion. There was a Soros color revolution in every single formerly Soviet republic. In every case it was identified as such. Only in Ukraine and I believe Kyrgyzstan did they have any success. In the 'Stan, intertribal relations that had been peaceful for generations were violently ripped open for no apparent reason. In the Ukraine the nation passed into the ownership of a Western bank, lost its Russophile Eastern third, and Crimea. The US talking about Putin on the march is like Mussolini complaining about Ethiopeans.

    Only in Ukraine and I believe Kyrgyzstan did they have any success. In the ‘Stan, intertribal relations that had been peaceful for generations were violently ripped open for no apparent reason. In the Ukraine the nation passed into the ownership of a Western bank, lost its Russophile Eastern third, and Crimea. The US talking about Putin on the march is like Mussolini complaining about Ethiopeans.

    It’s not us. Russian cruelty against its near neighbors is well know. Certainly Ukraine hasn’t forgot about the Great Famine, long after the Cossack pogroms against the Jews. At a minimum, for all the exterior Warsaw pact nations outside the USSR, all the Baltic republics and Ukraine, the primary intention of their foreign policy as independent nations is to repel Russian domination. (That is, of course, except for the parts of those countries that have been demographically colonized by Russia in a way that’s not too much different from Boyle Heights being colonized by Mexicans.)

    Therefore, we cannot acquiesce to that part of the world as being “Russia’s backyard,” the people who live there won’t allow it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Oh, it's you, helping me to know what a physicist feels when someone talks about free energy.
    , @istevefan

    Russian cruelty against its near neighbors is well know. Certainly Ukraine hasn’t forgot about the Great Famine, long after the Cossack pogroms against the Jews.
     
    First, the Holodomor was conducted when Stalin, a Georgian, was the ruler of the USSR.

    Second, it was carried out to a large extent by Lazar Kaganovich, who was most certainly not a Russian.

    Third, Ukraine has not forgotten about the Holodmor. In fact they ran afoul of some groups in 2009, when they tried to bring charges against the dead perpetrators:


    KIEV, Ukraine (JTA) — A Jewish group in Ukraine is objecting to a criminal case brought over the "Great Famine" committed in the 1930s.

    The nation’s security service is pressing the case against a list of former Soviet officials accused of committing the Holodomor, which caused the deaths of millions in Ukraine in 1932-33. Most of the names on the list were Jewish.

    Ukrainian lawmaker Aleksandr Feldman, leader of the Ukrainian Jewish Committee, said last week that it was "a farce" to press the case.

    “All organizers of the Great Famine are dead," he said.

    Last July, the Ukrainian Security Service released a list of high-ranking Soviet state and Communist Party officials — as well as officials from NKVD, the police force of Soviet Russia — that essentially blamed Jews and Latvians responsible for perpetrating and executing the famine because most of the names on the list were Jewish.

    The Ukrainian Jewish Committee called on the secret service to revise the list, which incited interethnic hatred, in order to clear up the “inaccuracy.”

    Feldman believes there is a danger that the “Holodomor Affair” materials are being used for political purposes.

    In late May, security service head Valentin Nalivaychenko claimed at a meeting with representatives of the World Congress of Ukrainians that “Ukraine has collected enough evidence to bring a criminal case regarding the famine, which was artificially created by the Bolshevik regime and caused mass death of citizens.”

    Through the World Congress of Ukrainians, Nalivaychenko turned to leading foreign lawyers with a request to help find out the circumstances connected with preparing and committing the genocide.

     

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Big Bill
    There's a ((guy)) at Instapundit who has Russians on the bean. He also posts articles about Mohammed bin Saud, the Wonderful Reformer of Islam. Why? Because MBS lets Saudi women wear burkas in colors other than black and (I kid you not) built a new movie theater in Saudi Arabia.

    The guy is so eager it's pathetic. I don't have the heart to tell him the Saudis still stone adultresses.

    Now that Israel has kissed and made up with Saudi Arabia, I guess we have to expect more pro-Saudi PR.

    The guy is so eager it’s pathetic. I don’t have the heart to tell him the Saudis still stone adultresses.

    Why am I supposed to care about that. Apparently Israel doesn’t. I supposed you can say that Russia’s culture is less gratuitously cruel than Saudi Arabia’s, but Saudi Arabia isn’t threatening to nuke us. So that changes things.

    Read More
    • Replies: @istevefan

    Apparently Israel doesn’t. I supposed you can say that Russia’s culture is less gratuitously cruel than Saudi Arabia’s, but Saudi Arabia isn’t threatening to nuke us. So that changes things.
     
    First, where the heck are you getting the notion that Russia is threatening to nuke us?

    Second, Saudi Arabia already attacked us on 9-11.

    Third, since 9-11 Saudi Arabia has been funding the sunni colonization of Europe and to a lesser extent the US.

    Fourth, Israel not caring about Europe or the US becoming more islamic is telling.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @inertial

    The Cold War. Let’s not forget – they tried to destroy us for 40 years.
     
    No they didn't. That part of the Cold War propaganda was an outright lie.

    The natural geo-political conditions align the two countries – both continental hegemons – to be competitors and rivals
     
    How exactly are America and Russia competitors, let alone natural ones? What are they competing over? The only reason these countries are close to war today is because America is poking around Russia's backyard (and the front yard, and the living room, and the bedroom.)

    How exactly are America and Russia competitors, let alone natural ones? What are they competing over? The only reason these countries are close to war today is because America is poking around Russia’s backyard (and the front yard, and the living room, and the bedroom.)

    They are competing over Russia’s inability to see itself as anything other than a Tier 1 superpower when it manifestly isn’t one.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Jack D
    Right, Putin is no threat at all to America. He is just a misunderstood guy. Yes, he poisons his enemies with nerve agents but who among us doesn't? Nothing to see here folks, move along.

    Right, Putin is no threat at all to America. He is just a misunderstood guy. Yes, he poisons his enemies with nerve agents but who among us doesn’t? Nothing to see here folks, move along.

    Truth be told, I could live with that even. But nuclear saber-rattling is not acceptable.

    The point of being a legitimate nuclear power is that you have nukes, not that you use them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • It’s unfortunate because our neocon foreign policy engenders bellicosity because the Russians, and anyone else in our crosshairs, must either become docile or react. Their reaction then causes others such as yourself to get caught up and possibly support the policies and people who created the situation in the first place.

    Yeah yeah yeah, bullshit.

    Syrias come and go, but in current instance we have Russian media, Russian government sources on background, even Russian government spokesmen, talking about their escalation plans toward nuking us over Syria (not least of which the Russia-friendly contributors to this site).

    The idea seems to be that yeah, neocons are nasty is a sufficient rationalization for anything. Well, no, there are lines and the Russians just crossed a big one.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Brutusale
    Moscow to Damascus is 1,538 miles.

    DC to Mexico City is 1,883 miles.

    If the Russians and their allies decided that Nieto was a monster and had to go, what threat level do you think the American president, no matter the party, would escalate to?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @istevefan

    I’m not Jewish, but I practically turned into a neocon within a week. The Russians are really threatening to nuke us over Syria? Fcuk ‘em.
     
    If that has turned you into a neocon, you might have already been one without even knowing it.

    If that has turned you into a neocon, you might have already been one without even knowing it.

    Not really. I thought the Russia thing was a red herring at worst. At best, I thought there was a window for, not necessarily an alliance, but a strategic partnership based on several possible occasions of shared interest.

    Unfortunately, it seems apparent that Russia is a prisoner of its own country-stature-ego/amour propre/whatever, and it’s trying to take the rest of us along for its ride.

    Read More
    • Replies: @istevefan

    Unfortunately, it seems apparent that Russia is a prisoner of its own country-stature-ego/amour propre/whatever, and it’s trying to take the rest of us along for its ride.
     
    It's unfortunate because our neocon foreign policy engenders bellicosity because the Russians, and anyone else in our crosshairs, must either become docile or react. Their reaction then causes others such as yourself to get caught up and possibly support the policies and people who created the situation in the first place.

    As for the threat from Russia, I haven't seen any threat other than they announcing new weaponry among their atomic arsenal. Which they would be expected to further develop given that's what we are doing with ours.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I gotta say, I pretty much changed my own opinion on this one practically overnight.

    I’m not Jewish, but I practically turned into a neocon within a week. The Russians are really threatening to nuke us over Syria? Fcuk ‘em.

    And if the antagonism from Russia, and against Russia, doesn’t dissipate soon (and it might not), this could have fairly substantial effects on US domestic politics that we weren’t anticipating. It’s one thing to jerk the reins in on the Deep State and its orientation against Russia when the primary issue appears to be salvaging Hillary’s sore loser ego. It’s quite another when the Russians are threatening to nuke us, in a fairly imminent time frame.

    Read More
    • Replies: @istevefan

    I’m not Jewish, but I practically turned into a neocon within a week. The Russians are really threatening to nuke us over Syria? Fcuk ‘em.
     
    If that has turned you into a neocon, you might have already been one without even knowing it.
    , @inertial

    The Russians are really threatening to nuke us over Syria?
     
    Huh? Where did you get that from?
    , @Anon
    The Russians are bluffing. They know they're bluffing. They've paid close attention to Trump's style and have noticed that Trump bluffs a lot, so they've adjusted accordingly and are trying to use his own tactics against him to pressure him.

    There does however, appear to be some serious nonsense going on between Theresa May and Putin, and May appears to be a really scheming and underhanded individual. The poisoning episode is beginning to look more and more like the work of the UK. The British have lied about the events of the poisoning so many times that their behavior is becoming much too suspicious. There is an old rule of law that goes, you don't lie in a murder case. It's too important unless you're the murderer.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • From the Jewish Telegraph Agency: Women’s March leader Tamika Mallory attacks Starbucks for including ADL in bias trainings April 18, 2018 11:00am (JTA) — A Women’s March leader mired in controversy because of her association with the virulently anti-Semitic Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan has attacked Starbucks for including the Anti-Defamation League among its...
  • @J.Ross
    >maintaining some kind of self-image as the vanguard of a new demographic wave
    >antifa
    Okay. You ever see an antifa thug with kids? They are single as a rule. Of course, that hardly matters when mainline Republicans despise their own voters and country.

    Okay. You ever see an antifa thug with kids? They are single as a rule. Of course, that hardly matters when mainline Republicans despise their own voters and country.

    You’re doin’ in wrong. It’s not about the demographics of replacement-level fertility among Left activists, it’s about the demographics of Trump (and the politics he represents) being a mistake and blip against the regular of the aspirations of the American people. Or in the alternative, that Trump and his politics is actually the legitimate representation of those aspirations.

    And in this context, no matter how awful our adversaries on the other side are, people like you just can’t help yourselves from starting a pissing match with Mitch McConnell or Paul Ryan. So how about you stop the bullshit one time and start being a legitimate American.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Department of Mom Couldn't You Have Named Your Book Something Else? For Me? For Once? My wife is reading it and says it's quite good. But this helps explain why the younger Reich doesn't want to touch the whole Jewish thing in his DNA research: He feels free to shine the harsh light of DNA...
  • LOL. Please tell me this is some kind of Jewish 50 Shades of Grey.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • From the Jewish Telegraph Agency: Women’s March leader Tamika Mallory attacks Starbucks for including ADL in bias trainings April 18, 2018 11:00am (JTA) — A Women’s March leader mired in controversy because of her association with the virulently anti-Semitic Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan has attacked Starbucks for including the Anti-Defamation League among its...
  • @J.Ross
    Why? Are police going to resume enforcing laws against assault?

    Why? Are police going to resume enforcing laws against assault?

    Because instead of maintaining some kind of self-image as the vanguard of a new demographic wave, they’ll be just random hoodlums, and can be treated by all parties that way, not least themselves.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    >maintaining some kind of self-image as the vanguard of a new demographic wave
    >antifa
    Okay. You ever see an antifa thug with kids? They are single as a rule. Of course, that hardly matters when mainline Republicans despise their own voters and country.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I’m telling you all, if we can manage to hold together ourselves past the November midterms, the “resistance” might be resisting a lot less.

    Read More
    • Agree: 27 year old
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Why? Are police going to resume enforcing laws against assault?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Commenter Ghgffffffff writes:
  • @Anonymous
    Poor Zack.

    Poor Zack.

    Yeah, it’d take more composure than I probably have to remain stoic while allowing some ignorant to bullhorn me from four feet away.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • On this 50th anniversary of the 1968 Fair Housing Act, there are countless articles in outlets like The New Yorker and The New York Times asking, in effect: Fifty years after the Fair Housing Act, why are so many African Americans still stuck in economically hopeless, job-deprived slums, such as, say, Brooklyn, Washington DC, the...
  • @Home Owner
    Some Indian guy bought an apartment house down the street from me, and tried to load it up with section 8'ers. All blacks. It had happened a couple of times before, and our neighbors and I just did what we always did.

    Insanely loud parties past 10? Call the police. Car double-parked in the street with sub-woofer blaring ghetto music? Call the police. Blacks squaring off in the middle of the street to beat the hell out of each other? We all call the police.

    After 6-12 months, most of our blacks either wind up in jail, or self-deport. Too much bullshit having to act like normal people. Mexicans are expert at giving poor dumb blacks a hard time also, god love 'em. The Indian owner wound up defaulting on his loan and the property went back to the bank. Blacks moved out.

    Most recently, the newest owner, a nice Chinese lady, decided to allow one section 8 black "family" to rent one of her units. Twice, they had a domestic quarrel that started in their apartment, and wound up in the middle of the street. We called the police on them both times. The third time it happened we called the police, and I also took it upon myself to call the landlord directly and fill her in. She had no idea what had been going on, and drove over and threatened to evict them if cops visited one more time. They’ve been generally quiet ever since, though they still park like brainless assholes, partially blocking h9meowners driveways overnight, etc. since they’re the only blacks around now, and they’ve improved a lot, we cut 'em some slack.

    Point being, just because you get into a white neighborhood, doesn’t mean you have what it takes to stay there. If you’re poor and black, and have problems with following the rule of law, or lack common decency, Whites, Asians, and especially Mexicans have little patience for your dysfunctional ghetto bullshit. We will fuck up your shit, as they say.

    More and more, there are less and less places to be a black asshole.

    Point being, just because you get into a white neighborhood, doesn’t mean you have what it takes to stay there. If you’re poor and black, and have problems with following the rule of law, or lack common decency, Whites, Asians, and especially Mexicans have little patience for your dysfunctional ghetto bullshit. We will fuck up your shit, as they say.

    More and more, there are less and less places to be a black asshole.

    As background, we’re going to eat the Democrats’ best shot this November whatever they have. But after that, maybe not.

    If the Democrats can’t take the House now, it might look like they never will. And as things like this start to surface, all the various Fringes in the Coalition might find that they care less about hating Republicans and more about the demographics of their neighborhoods.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Matthew Yglesias has finally gotten around to reading the 1994 bestseller The Bell Curve and he has some things he wants to say about it. From Vox: You can tell that Trump undoubtedly keeps his dog-eared copy of The Bell Curve on his bedside table from all the times he suddenly starts talking about standard...
  • @Disordered
    Does Trump really turn off non-elites? I'd argue that, while the persona isn't a saint, polls seem to still give him some support, even under the terrible circus news cycle. The Lewinsky affair did much to make Americans jaded about the necessity of good morals in a politician. If non-elites are turned off, it is more because the elites are sabotaging the agenda (when Trump doesn't do it himself, which happens less but does); thus the ugly side of the persona that was conveniently forgotten pops in again in the popular mind.

    At any rate... do we have a choice, but support Trump AND try to keep him along the right path? Not many others will, specially not those near him. He wasn't even a politician less than 3 years ago, so on one hand he has the popular upper hand, on the other he's had to barely learn to deal with government bureaucrats that hate him anyway. Though I understand your point, the ideology needs better expositors, else risk being viewed as Trumpism forever - not even due to whatever mistakes he makes, but because even if he is successful, that ideology must survive him. But, there's time and people constraints on this effort - not enough of either. Thus we must continue to toil in these ideals as best as we can, with whatever people we have on our side...

    Does Trump really turn off non-elites?

    Oh yes, in a very important way. Inside our own heads, nobody really thinks that we are better mathematicians than Terry Tao, or a better basketball player than LeBron, but everybody feels completely comfortable disdaining and ridiculing anything Donald Trump says or tweets. In fact, it typically makes us feel good when we do it. We mentally give ourselves 10 extra IQ points for the effort.

    Now, here’s the thing that those of us who are sympathetic to Trump’s place on the political spectrum aren’t getting. In contrast to other political figures, this applies at least as much to Trump’s supporters as his adversaries. Ie, people who voted for Trump and still support him for that matter, think he’s an ignorant idiot.

    There’s a lot of us here who are deluded by the Scott Adams/Jack Hanson idea that Trump has some super-hidden voodoo, so that all the bad polls numbers don’t matter and anyway he beat all those Republicans and Hillary. But that’s a red herring. It may or may not save him from being impeached. It’s not going to be a good thing for anything related to populist politics, ie immigration, if there’s a large otherwise malleable cohort of public opinion whose mentality is to oppose whatever Trump is in favor of.

    At any rate… do we have a choice, but support Trump AND try to keep him along the right path? Not many others will, specially not those near him. He wasn’t even a politician less than 3 years ago, so on one hand he has the popular upper hand, on the other he’s had to barely learn to deal with government bureaucrats that hate him anyway.

    I think so. We should be building up the GOP as “our team”, not least in our own minds, instead of being held hostage to whatever tactical mistakes or personal failings are associated with Trump.

    In particular, we have to be able to unwind the cult of the Presidency, just like we unwound the cult of the experts and political establishment to support Trump in the first place. The institutional GOP is capable of projecting longevity, competence and good character whereas Trump is not. So we should be trying to associate ourselves with them instead.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @BB753
    This is about Syria. Neocons want Assad dead. No matter what. And they won't let Trump stand in their way of invading the world, now that's he's partially ruined their other pet cause: inviting the world.
    If I were Trump I'd go medieval on tbeir asses with executive orders and whatever support he still has in the military. Trump has been facing a coup ever since he got to the White House. It's time for him to stage a counter-coup.

    If I were Trump I’d go medieval on tbeir asses with executive orders and whatever support he still has in the military. Trump has been facing a coup ever since he got to the White House. It’s time for him to stage a counter-coup.

    Yeah, right.

    I swear you might as well be neocons. I doubt if there’s a Member of the Tribe who pushes eternal war for Israel as much as much as some of you push eternal war for Trump.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Sunbeam
    "It’s not localized to Stormy Daniels either. If it were, I don’t think it would be nearly as important. It’s at least as likely that Bob Mueller has a paper trail of every real estate scam, every fraudulent loan application, and every shady business Trump has owned a part of in three decades as a New York businessman. I’m not even counting anything related to Russia, yet."

    My take on it is can you get enough Democrats + Republicans in the Senate to vote for impeachment.

    " A simple majority of the House is required to impeach the president. However, after impeachment the president remains in office until trial by the Senate.
    In the Senate, the House Judiciary Committee acts as the prosecution, the Senate as the jury and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as the judge who rules on the admissibility of the evidence presented. The accused president can hire his/her own lawyers. A two-thirds majority of the Senate is required to vote against the accused and remove the president from office."

    Got 67 votes to do so?

    The histrionics of the whole thing would be through the roof. God I bet some of those guys are absolutely giddy at the notion. Never before would such a grandstanding stage be given to so many self-important utter hacks in world history.

    Meanwhile nothing will be able to be accomplished by the Executive Branch. Well if anyone is capable of utterly ignoring the whole thing Trump is, which would work.

    But I absolutely guarantee you prosecuting one of these military actions like Iran, Iraq, or even what we have going in Syria would be utterly impossible.

    Congress you know, just not ever willing to go on record with an identifiable vote count for actually declaring war instead of just letting the Prez do whatever he wants or is amiable enough to do.

    My take on it is can you get enough Democrats + Republicans in the Senate to vote for impeachment[?]

    My take on this is we’re fcuked on this long before impeachment is close to materializing, like somehow the American people have an obligation to wait until Trump is actually impeached before they take it out on anything associated with Trump, ie us, and restrictionist immigration policy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Lot
    "So, at least as it pertains to immigration, the Overton Window is not our problem."

    In political races, sure. Republicans can and do win advocating solid restrictionist policies. In elite circles, definitely not. Here is an article comparing donations in 2012 to 2016 of employees of elite law firms and investment banks.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/06/opinion/trump-lawyers-elites.html

    In 2012 Romney received 42% of these donations. In 2016, Trump received less than 1%, only 40 donations out of 4812. While Romney's elite background and positions compared to Trump among these elites partly explains this, populism isn't -that- unpopular among elites, nor 100-1 less popular than Hillary-ism. The difference is that these people, who are working-age ambitious elites still running the rat race, are scared to make a public donation to Trump.

    This is why Trump's boorish behavior is so concerning. It got him votes and let him beat Jeb and Rubio amd Hillary, but it helped make him and immigrantion restriction even more toxic in elite circles, which explains why now that he is in office he has been so ineffective at doing much more than cutting the taxes of the rich and appointing judges who are largely former corporate lawyers or Koch-network functionaries.

    I don't mean to blame Trump completely, but he made a pre-existing trend worse for sure.

    This is why Trump’s boorish behavior is so concerning. It got him votes and let him beat Jeb and Rubio amd Hillary, but it helped make him and immigrantion restriction even more toxic in elite circles, which explains why now that he is in office he has been so ineffective at doing much more than cutting the taxes of the rich and appointing judges who are largely former corporate lawyers or Koch-network functionaries.

    Yeah, this is exactly right. It understates the case even. Trump’s persona turns off elites and non-elites both. Or as I like to put, the Overton Window is better for us because of Trump, but our position within the Window is worse.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Disordered
    Does Trump really turn off non-elites? I'd argue that, while the persona isn't a saint, polls seem to still give him some support, even under the terrible circus news cycle. The Lewinsky affair did much to make Americans jaded about the necessity of good morals in a politician. If non-elites are turned off, it is more because the elites are sabotaging the agenda (when Trump doesn't do it himself, which happens less but does); thus the ugly side of the persona that was conveniently forgotten pops in again in the popular mind.

    At any rate... do we have a choice, but support Trump AND try to keep him along the right path? Not many others will, specially not those near him. He wasn't even a politician less than 3 years ago, so on one hand he has the popular upper hand, on the other he's had to barely learn to deal with government bureaucrats that hate him anyway. Though I understand your point, the ideology needs better expositors, else risk being viewed as Trumpism forever - not even due to whatever mistakes he makes, but because even if he is successful, that ideology must survive him. But, there's time and people constraints on this effort - not enough of either. Thus we must continue to toil in these ideals as best as we can, with whatever people we have on our side...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Ozymandias
    "...now in possession of Mueller or the US Attorney’s office to be referred to Mueller as the case may be."

    Or leaked at the appropriate time. The Deep State has just illegally seized ALL of the President's private communications with his lawyer. It's a naked attempt to overthrow the legally elected government.

    Or leaked at the appropriate time.

    Yeah, that’s certainly a possibility.

    It’s a naked attempt to overthrow the legally elected government.

    Meh, maybe, maybe not. The important thing is, it’s nothing we have a countermove for.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Berty
    I once admired Donald Trump and Jeff Sessions. It amazing how thoroughly both have disappointed me in such a short amount of time.

    I once admired Donald Trump and Jeff Sessions. It amazing how thoroughly both have disappointed me in such a short amount of time.

    I think Sessions has been getting a bad rap from Trump for the most part, but I don’t he’s exactly covered himself in glory with this Cohen business. From everything we’ve heard this is about Stormy Daniels so I don’t see any reason why Sessions should be recused.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Sunbeam
    A theory.

    I'd say the problem with it is no one really believes the mainstream media any more. They are that ridiculous. Literally the morning talk shows start now by playing what Jimmy Kimmel or Steven Colbert did on their monologue last night.

    Better be a heck of a smoking gun. Do you really think anyone at all is going to get their knickers in a twist if Stormy Daniels was paid off?

    They'll bleat about it on the news, make jokes on the talk shows. The only people who will care or pay attention are the people that want to experience Trump hate enough to watch that Trevor Noah show.

    Tell you what though. I'd absolutely love it if a special counsel was named to investigate Mueller. And Comey. And...

    Use exactly the same tactics, and engage in a perpetual dirt digging operation.

    I’d say the problem with it is no one really believes the mainstream media any more. They are that ridiculous. Literally the morning talk shows start now by playing what Jimmy Kimmel or Steven Colbert did on their monologue last night.

    Better be a heck of a smoking gun. Do you really think anyone at all is going to get their knickers in a twist if Stormy Daniels was paid off?

    No, it’s not about about what the MSM can convince its audience of. It’s about what dozens of well-paid federal prosecutors can convince a jury of, while Michael Cohen has to gets maybe 2-3 guys tops and has to pay maybe hundreds of thousands to do it, if he’s got that much money lying around.

    It’s not localized to Stormy Daniels either. If it were, I don’t think it would be nearly as important. It’s at least as likely that Bob Mueller has a paper trail of every real estate scam, every fraudulent loan application, and every shady business Trump has owned a part of in three decades as a New York businessman. I’m not even counting anything related to Russia, yet.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sunbeam
    "It’s not localized to Stormy Daniels either. If it were, I don’t think it would be nearly as important. It’s at least as likely that Bob Mueller has a paper trail of every real estate scam, every fraudulent loan application, and every shady business Trump has owned a part of in three decades as a New York businessman. I’m not even counting anything related to Russia, yet."

    My take on it is can you get enough Democrats + Republicans in the Senate to vote for impeachment.

    " A simple majority of the House is required to impeach the president. However, after impeachment the president remains in office until trial by the Senate.
    In the Senate, the House Judiciary Committee acts as the prosecution, the Senate as the jury and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as the judge who rules on the admissibility of the evidence presented. The accused president can hire his/her own lawyers. A two-thirds majority of the Senate is required to vote against the accused and remove the president from office."

    Got 67 votes to do so?

    The histrionics of the whole thing would be through the roof. God I bet some of those guys are absolutely giddy at the notion. Never before would such a grandstanding stage be given to so many self-important utter hacks in world history.

    Meanwhile nothing will be able to be accomplished by the Executive Branch. Well if anyone is capable of utterly ignoring the whole thing Trump is, which would work.

    But I absolutely guarantee you prosecuting one of these military actions like Iran, Iraq, or even what we have going in Syria would be utterly impossible.

    Congress you know, just not ever willing to go on record with an identifiable vote count for actually declaring war instead of just letting the Prez do whatever he wants or is amiable enough to do.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • OT but not really:

    Donald Trump has moved the Overton Window in our favor. So, at least as it pertains to immigration, the Overton Window is not our problem. The problem is that the determination of the American people to assert our self-determination and protect our human capital is pretty marginal, really. If we had that determination, we could get the policies we need to implement it (e-Verify, the wall, birthright citizenship, whatever). Without that determination, those policies would be undermined and rendered ineffective even if we had them, which we don’t.

    This the backdrop to yesterday, wherein the US Attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York raided the office, house, and hotel of Donald Trump’s personal attorney. There’s a thousand possibilities relating to the motivations and consequences of this, and none of them are good.

    Among other things, if this is the Deep State going rogue, as has been suggested, this is not Mueller or the FBI (which has also been suggested). No this is the main Justice Dept which did this, including Rosenstein and maybe even Sessions (plus of course a judge to sign the warrant). There are a lot of institutional safeguards to prevent this from happening as a matter of routine business, so I’d venture that at the very least there’s some prosecutor with a very solid set of facts to associate Michael Cohen with some kind of criminal activity.

    For me, the key question is what is that criminal activity? From what I’ve seen so far, it could be Stormy Daniels, it could be taxicab medallions in NYC, or it could be something bigger that we haven’t heard of yet. Now, here’s the thing: if it is Stormy Daniels, which is as good a guess as any right now, that is a horrible prosecutorial overreach. But, we don’t have any good countermoves for it.

    Essentially, the way that’s likely to shake down is, yeah, Cohen is guilty and Trump is guilty but they really shouldn’t have raided a lawyer’s office. Are we really going to get any traction from that? I’m doubting it.

    There’s other bad consequences as well. First of all, the main play is that Cohen flips on Trump, and implicates the President in some kind of criminal activity, in exchange for immunity or reduced sentence for himself. But there’s another angle which I suspect might end up being even more important. Even if Cohen refuses to cooperate, or doesn’t know anything, or is protected from implicating Trump by attorney-client privilege, there’s still all the documents, email, spreadsheets, online account info etc., now in possession of Mueller or the US Attorney’s office to be referred to Mueller as the case may be.

    Now here’s where I’m not completely confident, but my guess is, that even if Cohen’s testimony isn’t available or can’t be used against Trump, whatever is in those documents can and will.

    If had better Establishment connections, he’d have better lawyers and he wouldn’t be getting rolled up through My Cousin Vinny.

    As it pertains to us, we’re at risk of losing support in the public opinion for Trump and the GOP. This is what kills us. We’ve got no margin to spare. The determination of the American people to assert our self-determination is weak enough as it is, without Trump weakening it further for unrelated reasons. A populist/conservative coalition is a winning hand in American politics right now. We can’t afford to let Trump screw it up on his own crap.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sunbeam
    A theory.

    I'd say the problem with it is no one really believes the mainstream media any more. They are that ridiculous. Literally the morning talk shows start now by playing what Jimmy Kimmel or Steven Colbert did on their monologue last night.

    Better be a heck of a smoking gun. Do you really think anyone at all is going to get their knickers in a twist if Stormy Daniels was paid off?

    They'll bleat about it on the news, make jokes on the talk shows. The only people who will care or pay attention are the people that want to experience Trump hate enough to watch that Trevor Noah show.

    Tell you what though. I'd absolutely love it if a special counsel was named to investigate Mueller. And Comey. And...

    Use exactly the same tactics, and engage in a perpetual dirt digging operation.
    , @BB753
    This is about Syria. Neocons want Assad dead. No matter what. And they won't let Trump stand in their way of invading the world, now that's he's partially ruined their other pet cause: inviting the world.
    If I were Trump I'd go medieval on tbeir asses with executive orders and whatever support he still has in the military. Trump has been facing a coup ever since he got to the White House. It's time for him to stage a counter-coup.
    , @Lot
    "So, at least as it pertains to immigration, the Overton Window is not our problem."

    In political races, sure. Republicans can and do win advocating solid restrictionist policies. In elite circles, definitely not. Here is an article comparing donations in 2012 to 2016 of employees of elite law firms and investment banks.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/06/opinion/trump-lawyers-elites.html

    In 2012 Romney received 42% of these donations. In 2016, Trump received less than 1%, only 40 donations out of 4812. While Romney's elite background and positions compared to Trump among these elites partly explains this, populism isn't -that- unpopular among elites, nor 100-1 less popular than Hillary-ism. The difference is that these people, who are working-age ambitious elites still running the rat race, are scared to make a public donation to Trump.

    This is why Trump's boorish behavior is so concerning. It got him votes and let him beat Jeb and Rubio amd Hillary, but it helped make him and immigrantion restriction even more toxic in elite circles, which explains why now that he is in office he has been so ineffective at doing much more than cutting the taxes of the rich and appointing judges who are largely former corporate lawyers or Koch-network functionaries.

    I don't mean to blame Trump completely, but he made a pre-existing trend worse for sure.
    , @Ozymandias
    "...now in possession of Mueller or the US Attorney’s office to be referred to Mueller as the case may be."

    Or leaked at the appropriate time. The Deep State has just illegally seized ALL of the President's private communications with his lawyer. It's a naked attempt to overthrow the legally elected government.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • When not busy wondering why African American rioters only commit "restrained arson" these days compared to the Good Old Days of the high tide of liberalism in the late 1960s, The Atlantic has fired former National Review writer Kevin Williamson. From the NYT: I'm not very familiar with Williamson's work, so I don't have an...
  • @TWS
    I think the problem is there are simply too few, 'Mattises'.

    I think the problem is there are simply too few, ‘Mattises’.

    I think that’s exactly right. He’s a general, so Trump is going to be at least a little bit intimidated by the stars. But way beyond being a general, he’s Mattis. It’s not very much of an exaggeration at all to say that he’s a world historical figure comparable to MacArthur or Sherman or Pershing or whoever, before he served in the Trump Administration.

    In general, Trump really doesn’t do ideas, and he doesn’t do words on paper. He manages, interprets, evaluates through personal relationships. Well, there’s only so much bandwidth and so many people you can interact with on that basis. So, if you don’t have a body of doctrine or a cadre of loyalists to lean on (and Trump doesn’t have either one), your real operational control over an organization as extensive as the federal government well necessarily be very limited.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @IHTG
    Trump plays well with Mattis. There could have been more Mattises.

    Trump plays well with Mattis. There could have been more Mattises.

    That’s been ok so far. I can’t see how the lack of Mattises is somehow the fault of National Review as opposed to Trump himself.

    Read More
    • Replies: @TWS
    I think the problem is there are simply too few, 'Mattises'.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Dave Pinsen
    I do think the National Review crowd bears some blame for Trump being so shorthanded.

    I do think the National Review crowd bears some blame for Trump being so shorthanded.

    I don’t. Trump’s career has shown us, over and over again, pre and post-politics, that He Does Not Play Well With Others. Let’s avoid the mistake of trying to blame other people for Trump’s problems.

    Read More
    • Replies: @IHTG
    Trump plays well with Mattis. There could have been more Mattises.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @snorlax
    Let's pour another one out for ¡Jeb!

    A bald eagle sheds a single tear.

    Guac: 1776-2016

    Let’s pour another one out for ¡Jeb!

    I was never an enthusiast for Jeb, but even if I were it wouldn’t make a difference for this.

    And it’s not supposed to be that hard. When Trump is the best option for advancing our national interest, then we’re with Trump. When he’s not, we’re looking to find the next guy who is.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @MG
    I have not the least bit of sympathy for guys like Williamson and Charles Murray. It is okay to not like Trump. It is not okay to tear down Trump if you believe (as I do) the Left wants to dismantle America as we know it.

    I have not the least bit of sympathy for guys like Williamson and Charles Murray. It is okay to not like Trump. It is not okay to tear down Trump if you believe (as I do) the Left wants to dismantle America as we know it.

    That’s assuming that the Trump as President is stopping the Left from destroying America instead of helping it along, which is in no way a given.

    Read More
    • Replies: @snorlax
    Let's pour another one out for ¡Jeb!

    A bald eagle sheds a single tear.

    Guac: 1776-2016
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @nebulafox
    As I said before, screw this SOB and where he came from. Guys like him who view the US as a corporation or a store rather than a nation-state are a big reason as to why "conservatism" in the US is so messed up. If Conservatism Inc's ideology worked, Romney would be POTUS now.

    That said, that the cause of this was a 2014 Tweet should underline further how much the center-left is going off the reservation to try and appease the ideologues in their coalition. It'll come back to haunt them when they realize they've ditched most other Americans in the process.

    As I said before, screw this SOB and where he came from. Guys like him who view the US as a corporation or a store rather than a nation-state are a big reason as to why “conservatism” in the US is so messed up. If Conservatism Inc’s ideology worked, Romney would be POTUS now.

    I’d like to be sympathetic to this, but it’s not a good thing when the other side mobs up for the purpose of sacking the quarterback and then ends up sacking the quarterback.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    Romney was not likable like Hillary was not likable - get over it!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • A Huge Caravan Of Central Americans Is Headed For The US, And No One In Mexico Dares To Stop Them "If we all protect each other, we'll get through this together." Originally posted on March 30, 2018, at 4:00 a.m. Adolfo Flores BuzzFeed News Reporter San Pedro Tapanatepec, MexicoTaking a drag from her cigarette, a...
  • @Jack Hanson
    You eeyore crybaby blackpillers continue to be wrong on trade, on immigration, on foreign affairs, on DACA and yet you still whine. Do you do anything but cry? Will you ever admit how you're always wrong?

    You eeyore crybaby blackpillers continue to be wrong on trade, on immigration, on foreign affairs, on DACA and yet you still whine. Do you do anything but cry? Will you ever admit how you’re always wrong?

    Cut the shit, Jack.

    At the risk of ruining your reputation (and contrary to my earlier opinion), you actually do have some brains, but you’re waaaayyy too invested in the big internet tough guy crap.

    “Yeah, all the big brains told me Trump was going to lose but then it turned out he won, so I can ignore the whole real world forever and just believe what I want. Herpy derp.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • From a New York Times book review Here's the conclusion of Schama's review: Jews used to be famous for witty self-awareness. But, other than Larry David, how many Jews in 2018 would notice anything amusing about Professor Schama, a historian for heaven's sake, demonizing as "tribalist" those American patriots who don't believe that the fundamental...
  • Not so much about Jews necessarily, but the SWPL left in general has turned decisively toward liberalized immigration. This isn’t thought out very well, but it is an important “tribal” marker to the goodthinkers opposed to Trump.

    Trump has moved the Overton Window in our favor, but for a lot of things, especially immigration, our position within the window is worse off for Trump. When Obama created DACA, it was perceived as a desperate, certainly illegitimate, maybe unconstitutional end run around Congress. Now, everybody’s forgotten all about that, and the business about “know no other home” blah blah fills our airwaves.

    Read More
    • Agree: Tyrion 2
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Here's the top story in the Washington Post: Whatever happened to globalism? Can Democrats read these wacky xenophobic takes with a straight face? I guess they must. But still ...
  • OMG!!! Thank God for Cambridge Analytica. Think of the facebook user data manipulations rotting in the field.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Frau Katze
    Now that is funny! But I’ve used up my button clicks.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @J.Ross

    We won’t have to fight them nearly so hard again.
     
    So that's why Bill Clinton lost, because of Dukakis? This is objectively wrong, and completely indefensible coming from a guy who wants to be the Party Active. Electorates do not avoid voting because they lost last time; if anything, electorates do not remember their last vote (or care that much about it). They vote on if the economy is good, how the incumbents are performing (note the tense), and maybe one or two really big current issues.
    For example, Trump was elected to send a message to neocon and establishmentarian scum, not to behave like a Democrat. Now that he has signed the omnibus bill ("never again," he says) there actually is hope for a blue wave. There wasn't before, Democrats were in all kinds of trouble. GOP'ers have snatched defeat out of the jaws of victory.

    Now that he has signed the omnibus bill (“never again,” he says) there actually is hope for a blue wave. There wasn’t before, Democrats were in all kinds of trouble. GOP’ers have snatched defeat out of the jaws of victory.

    Oh my word. JRoss, who supposedly is aware of Trump’s 40% approval rating, Democrats leading generic ballots by 10%, winning special elections in Trump-favorable districts, nonetheless could not see the possibility for a blue wave this November until President Trump signed the omnibus spending bill. Jesus Christ, can’t anybody here play this game?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @J.Ross
    Are you being satirical? "Hey bro, it's not cool to criticize the government! Those people have feelings too! Let's not punch down, or up, let's punch sideways!" Is this really what you're saying?

    Are you being satirical? “Hey bro, it’s not cool to criticize the government! Those people have feelings too! Let’s not punch down, or up, let’s punch sideways!” Is this really what you’re saying?

    No, what I’m saying is that it’s not cool to criticize the Republicans. Sometimes it has to be done, but it is never a good thing. Sometimes the GOP wins, sometimes they lose, but they are always Our Team. Always, always, always.

    Like any good team or any good family, when there are internal problems, get the relevant people together, face-to-face, behind closed doors, and straighten in out. Then, and this is important, present a united front to the rest of the world.

    This is so basic, really. The idea that somehow we’re above that, because Paul Ryan is a cuck, or some other embarrassing specious bullshit, is stupid. If we do go the way of all flesh, you can’t say we didn’t deserve it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @J.Ross

    We won’t have to fight them nearly so hard again.
     
    So that's why Bill Clinton lost, because of Dukakis? This is objectively wrong, and completely indefensible coming from a guy who wants to be the Party Active. Electorates do not avoid voting because they lost last time; if anything, electorates do not remember their last vote (or care that much about it). They vote on if the economy is good, how the incumbents are performing (note the tense), and maybe one or two really big current issues.
    For example, Trump was elected to send a message to neocon and establishmentarian scum, not to behave like a Democrat. Now that he has signed the omnibus bill ("never again," he says) there actually is hope for a blue wave. There wasn't before, Democrats were in all kinds of trouble. GOP'ers have snatched defeat out of the jaws of victory.

    So that’s why Bill Clinton lost, because of Dukakis? This is objectively wrong, and completely indefensible coming from a guy who wants to be the Party Active. Electorates do not avoid voting because they lost last time; if anything, electorates do not remember their last vote (or care that much about it). They vote on if the economy is good, how the incumbents are performing (note the tense), and maybe one or two really big current issues.

    I’m not talking about Clinton or Dukakis, I’m talking about they way things are now. I put a link to some charts further upthread, it might have even been in response to you.

    In any event, the pussy hats, the antifa, the Mueller-Russia hype, PA-18, all of it is part of the same whole, which is that the Left is desperate. They have lost a lot of power that they think is by right theirs, and they are flailing about every which way they can think of to get it back. And even beyond the pussy hats and the rest of it, the primary avenue for their energy is the determination to regain as much overt political power as they possibly can for the next election, November 2018.

    Let’s emphasize again, I’m talking about this election season, 2018, not 1988, not in general. According to the charts, in PA-18 special election, the Dem candidate ran at 80% of the Presidential year baseline, the GOP guy ran at 50% of the Presidential year baseline. Their side is desperately motivated to go vote, our side isn’t.

    If somehow they don’t take over the House this November all that energy will be defeated by the sense of futility. It is a huge, huge opportunity to beat the other side when they are in a particularly strong state of desperation and motivation. If somehow, some way we can beat them then, what comes after that is resignation. Ie, you can work a phone bank or knock on doors if you want to, but the Republicans control Congress, that’s just the Way Things Are.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @J.Ross
    Oh hey, what's this?

    Gun Control in the Omnibus

    The bill contains a gun control provision (Fix NICS) which would strip millions of veterans, seniors, medical marijuana smokers, traffic ticket violators, and others of their constitutional rights -- without substantive due process.

    Earlier this year, the House leadership team guaranteed that the anti-gun Fix NICS bill would not move separately, without reciprocity added.

    But that was a lie. And now, many pro-gun congressmen are very upset.

    “What we were told by our leadership is directly opposite what is happening today,” said Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH).

    The bill also contained a “school safety proposal,” which prohibits money from being used for guns and gun training.

    So none of the Omnibus funds can be used to arm teachers -- or school resource officers, such as the hero who stopped a shooting at a Maryland school this week.

    Oh hey, what’s this?

    Gun Control in the Omnibus

    So what of it?

    A year or so back maybe, Steve had a few posts about the logic of “punching up” which is supposedly ok as opposed to “punching down” which isn’t. I forget exactly what the point was then, but now at least we should be able to see a pattern of gratuitously trashing people for the fcuk of it, and the negative consequences that follow.

    First there was the sitcom dads from the 70s and 80s, and they were kind of clownish as the head of the family. And it was kind of funny then but now we have to deal with fatherlessness and the lousy childrearing that accompanies that.

    Then it was the “white male” thing, regarding political correctness and originating in academia. At first it was sort of whimsical, yeah, your market research shows that women are more likely to spend household discretionary income for entertainment, but how many of your researchers are anything other than white males.

    And now it’s the Republicans. Yeah Republicans do a good job of keeping the lid on spending when a Democrat is President, but elect one of them and it goes through the roof.

    In every case, it’s the same thing. First it was funny, then it was annoying, then it was serious as a heart attack. And it happens for the same reasons each time. The things that turn out ok, we take for granted, and the things that don’t are somebody else’s fault. Well, in reality that’s just bullshit. We take it for granted but then when it’s gone we bitch like hell.

    To be honest, I haven’t been following this omnibus thing very much. From what I’ve seen, I have no doubt that we booked a loser. So what, there will be another game next week. But it’s the Republican Party that keeps us competitive enough to play the game in the first place. Without them, we’re fcuked, as we’ve found out on more than one occasion in the recent past.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Are you being satirical? "Hey bro, it's not cool to criticize the government! Those people have feelings too! Let's not punch down, or up, let's punch sideways!" Is this really what you're saying?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @The Anti-Gnostic
    In an ideal world, yes, the GOP candidate would be a straight-arrow combat veteran named Marcus Aurelius who sees that $100 electoral bill lying on the floor--a deep disquiet about globalism--and grabs it. Our system is not really set up to reward such people, so we get a brash outsider who, while derided as buffoonish and stupid, somehow manages to beat a dozen professional politicians and the Big Enchilada herself.

    Why isn't the Republican Party, with two branches of government in its control, riding this wave? Again, structurally, they're no longer set up for it. They constantly punch right, and dislike Trump and his voters' agenda even more than that of their Democratic opponents. The Republican strategy seems to be to get sinecures for individuals in the form of safe legislative seats and a place in the permanent bureaucracy rather than actual governance.

    The rallying point is Trump, not the Party. And if the Party doesn't rally then it's done.

    Why isn’t the Republican Party, with two branches of government in its control, riding this wave?

    This is Trump. Most of us here on iSteve don’t want to hear it, but that’s the way it is. If it weren’t for Trump, we would be. The voters aren’t paying any attention to the fact that unemployment is below 5%, or North Korea might be denuclearizing, or any of several things that would help the political standing of Trump and other Republicans, because Trump can’t go one news cycle without sending an inflammatory tweet or having an associate indicted by the Independent Counsel.

    Again, structurally, they’re no longer set up for it. They constantly punch right, and dislike Trump and his voters’ agenda even more than that of their Democratic opponents. The Republican strategy seems to be to get sinecures for individuals in the form of safe legislative seats and a place in the permanent bureaucracy rather than actual governance.

    The GOP Establishment has its problems, but they’re not the ones causing the current poor standing politically, for the reasons I mentioned above.

    The rallying point is Trump, not the Party. And if the Party doesn’t rally then it’s done.

    That’s exactly right, and that’s a huge mistake for us (no pun intended).

    We need to rally around the Party. The Party has strength, depth, and longevity, and Trump has none of these. Now typically this is where the Jack Hanson/Scott Adams types invoke their theory that Trump is actually doing ok. We can discount his adverse standing in the polls because of his unconventional profile. And that theory is likely right in that his situation is not as bad as another guy would be with the same numbers. But, and this is important, it’s still bad.

    We need to quit making excuses and rationalizations for Trump, and start finding reasons to support Mitch McConnell and Devin Nunes, and figure out a working relationship with them instead.

    This doesn’t mean we have to start trashing Trump, or dump him, but it does mean that he can’t be the rallying point any more.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross

    We need to rally around the Party
     
    The Party that wants us to lose our jobs, lose our rights, lose our homes, lose our families, and die violently? What year do you think it is? What on earth would it take for the Party to fake any conservative values? I almost want them to come out on Saturday embracing the Parkland Players because you know what happens then.
    , @J.Ross
    Oh hey, what's this?

    Gun Control in the Omnibus

    The bill contains a gun control provision (Fix NICS) which would strip millions of veterans, seniors, medical marijuana smokers, traffic ticket violators, and others of their constitutional rights -- without substantive due process.

    Earlier this year, the House leadership team guaranteed that the anti-gun Fix NICS bill would not move separately, without reciprocity added.

    But that was a lie. And now, many pro-gun congressmen are very upset.

    “What we were told by our leadership is directly opposite what is happening today,” said Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH).

    The bill also contained a “school safety proposal,” which prohibits money from being used for guns and gun training.

    So none of the Omnibus funds can be used to arm teachers -- or school resource officers, such as the hero who stopped a shooting at a Maryland school this week.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @J.Ross
    Right, there is one huge undiscussed political fact of the moment: whites are tribalizing, and are still majority enough that when they vote as whites, they win, and in numbers big enough to prevent cheating. There is no strategy, rhetorical device, or belly-flopping concession the GOP has that can touch this.

    Right, there is one huge undiscussed political fact of the moment: whites are tribalizing, and are still majority enough that when they vote as whites, they win, and in numbers big enough to prevent cheating.

    This is a great point. However, the consequence of this is the opposite of what you want to imply. In order for the increased solidarity of white voters to have any consequence, there has to be a vehicle to coalesce around. Fortunately for us, in America there is such a vehicle, it’s called the Republican party.

    I forget the exact numbers but one important fact of the 2016 election was that Trump only did a point or two better among white voters than Romney in 2012. For all the college-educated voters Trump hemorrhaged with his buffonery, he picked up a little more non-educated white voters, and furthermore got them exactly where he needed to win.

    Therefore, going forward the model should be clear, or at least it is for me: build an agenda and credibility for the hidden voters Trump successfully brought out of the woodwork, and at the same time retain and expand the traditional GOP base, by getting rid of Trump himself and his gratuitous buffoonery and stupidity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
    In an ideal world, yes, the GOP candidate would be a straight-arrow combat veteran named Marcus Aurelius who sees that $100 electoral bill lying on the floor--a deep disquiet about globalism--and grabs it. Our system is not really set up to reward such people, so we get a brash outsider who, while derided as buffoonish and stupid, somehow manages to beat a dozen professional politicians and the Big Enchilada herself.

    Why isn't the Republican Party, with two branches of government in its control, riding this wave? Again, structurally, they're no longer set up for it. They constantly punch right, and dislike Trump and his voters' agenda even more than that of their Democratic opponents. The Republican strategy seems to be to get sinecures for individuals in the form of safe legislative seats and a place in the permanent bureaucracy rather than actual governance.

    The rallying point is Trump, not the Party. And if the Party doesn't rally then it's done.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @MarkinLA
    For example, there’s polls that supposedly show that 60-80-whatever percent of Americans favor normalizing the DACA participants.

    And no attempts to attack the legitimacy of those polls. Nobody ever follows up with questions about their parents if they are normalized. No attempts is made to show exactly how special the Dreamers are (only 35% have high school diplomas from some of the crappiest schools in America). They also use push polls and don't ask the question in any way that would give a negative result such as "Do you really care if the DACAs are deported".

    The bottom line is that nobody is going to change his vote over the Dreamers but the media makes it appear that it is issue number 1 in the country.

    And no attempts to attack the legitimacy of those polls.

    Well no, in a bank shot way Trump and the GOP have attacked the legitimacy of those polls. They simply called Schumer’s bluff over the matter. And that part worked. It’s just that other parts of Trump and his erratic persona and volatile governance are turning the voters off, the taking the GOP down with him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @J.Ross
    After this omnibus bill and the submission on gun rights what Republican voter is going to be excited to vote?

    After this omnibus bill and the submission on gun rights what Republican voter is going to be excited to vote?

    All of them, I hope. If we’re going to sell out our loyalty to the Republican Party over what’s in the omnibus funding bill, we deserve to go the way of the dodo bird.

    It’s obvious if you can about the likes of Tiny Duck for a second and what his motivations are likely to be. Do you suppose, for one second, that he cares about the difference between John McCain and Tom Cotton? Of course not. If gets his way, we’re going to get rid of Donald Trump and Tom Cotton and John McCain and Mike Lee and Lindsey Graham and Laura Ingraham and Samuel Alito and Rush Limbaugh, etc, etc, etc.

    He is empowered toward those ends by the increase in enthusiasm and motivation of Democratic-leaning voters. But here’s the thing. If those voters all go the polls with a head full of steam and motivation, and they lose anyway, that puts a big damper on things. The won’t be as motivated in the future. We won’t have to fight them nearly so hard again.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross

    We won’t have to fight them nearly so hard again.
     
    So that's why Bill Clinton lost, because of Dukakis? This is objectively wrong, and completely indefensible coming from a guy who wants to be the Party Active. Electorates do not avoid voting because they lost last time; if anything, electorates do not remember their last vote (or care that much about it). They vote on if the economy is good, how the incumbents are performing (note the tense), and maybe one or two really big current issues.
    For example, Trump was elected to send a message to neocon and establishmentarian scum, not to behave like a Democrat. Now that he has signed the omnibus bill ("never again," he says) there actually is hope for a blue wave. There wasn't before, Democrats were in all kinds of trouble. GOP'ers have snatched defeat out of the jaws of victory.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @MarkinLA
    The GOP has been around in its current form since before the Civil War. Maybe we should be working helping them out and not worrying about Trump so much, because they are going to be around long after Trump is gone. And we’ll probably be needing them then as well.

    Isn't the goal of the GOP leadership to do nothing and wait Trump out so everything reverts back to normal? I thought the idea was to make the GOP more like Trump. How does reflexively supporting the GOP do that?

    I thought the idea was to make the GOP more like Trump.

    This is not a good formulation.

    For the most part, it’s a simplistic and juvenile mentality to go on about beating down the GOPe and the cucks and RINOs and the usual. But even if it sounds innocuous for you, this is even worse.

    Even if we were motivated to antagonize the GOPe, we still wouldn’t want the GOP to be more like Trump. That would mean the GOP is about keeping Jared out of jail, real estate scams in Florida, and hush money to adult movie actresses. That is what Trump is about, and the GOP ought, supposedly, to be like him.

    We need the institutional party to have more credibility to implementing a populist agenda. For that we need supporters to help the party in that regard while retaining its competence and reputational capital. Emphasis on supporters. It has to be people with some loyalty to stay firm through the inevitable problems.

    Would you trust a Mexican gov’t functionary to tell the US what our immigration policy ought to be? Well, Republicans think the same way.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @J.Ross
    If we can’t be bothered to stay loyal to our shared citizenship as Americans

    What does this mean? Does it mean "hold a memory of a funny, three-cornered hat in your head, so you can keep still while Angel begins to cut your neck"? My understanding of my citizenship is not "legitimize my own destruction."

    What does this mean? Does it mean “hold a memory of a funny, three-cornered hat in your head, so you can keep still while Angel begins to cut your neck”? My understanding of my citizenship is not “legitimize my own destruction.”

    Ohhh, I feel so bad, do you want me to play the violin for you? The Republicans cucked, and there was nothing we could do.

    God, I hope you are not representative of white America in the current year. ‘Cause if you are, Tiny Duck was right the whole time.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @vx37
    That's some classic concern trolling right there. Thanks to demographic changes brought about largely by Republican treason, voting Republican will soon be an exercise in futility, a protest vote, like voting Green or Libertarian. They're not going to always be around, they're circling the drain.

    That’s some classic concern trolling right there. Thanks to demographic changes brought about largely by Republican treason, voting Republican will soon be an exercise in futility, a protest vote, like voting Green or Libertarian. They’re not going to always be around, they’re circling the drain.

    Bullshit. There may be a day sometime when voting GOP is an exercise in futility, but it clearly isn’t today.

    There’s some useful charts at this link:

    Basically it says that PA-18 Dem voters were strongly motivated to vote for Lamb, but the GOP voters were indifferent to Sacchone. This is good and bad news. The bad news is obvious: it means that it’s harder for the GOP to win elections in this jurisdiction. And in fact Lamb, the Democrat, did win this special election.

    The good news is more subtle, though actually more important imo. If somehow, some way, the GOP can beat the Dems in the year the Dems are geared up by Trump, we’ll win a lot of battles in the future because the other side isn’t going to bother to show up.

    All the outside money flooding into Ossoff, or Conor Lamb, or the Pussy Hat Marches, or the Parkland HS students, all those people are motivated toward political activism because they hate what Trump represents, and also because they think they can will win with it. Take away half of this equation and things change. People find other stuff to do with their time and energy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    After this omnibus bill and the submission on gun rights what Republican voter is going to be excited to vote?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @J.Ross
    So McCain trying to start a war with a nuclear power and colluding with terrorists, McConnell kowtowing to Beijing, and Republicans in general welcoming in as many Democrat-voting Mestizos as they can, represent our interests? The GOP is dead. The GOP put up twenty respectable, Inner Party approved, Luntz tested, establishment candidates, and they all wiped out before a guy no respectable person thought could win at any level. Dems are dead too (Bernie had popular support that cheating Hillary did not) but get carried around as in a funeral march by their new peones. Who's "we" indeed. Maybe there will be a blue wave in autumn, but it will neither be Trump's fault nor the Democrat's work. This spending bill is the "party of our values" telling the only people who think this party should legally be allowed to exist, let alone would vote for it, to violently kill ourselves while aging boomers and rioting gangbangers cheer and laugh.
    We're not going to kill ourselves, we're going to kill your party. These are your last elections. If you can't get it together in this time frame then you can look forward to being whoever it was in Mexico that wasn't the Institutional Revolutionary Party for a human lifetime. You'll exist, and there will even be people who vote for you, but not in any serious sense.

    These are your last elections. If you can’t get it together in this time frame then you can look forward to being whoever it was in Mexico that wasn’t the Institutional Revolutionary Party for a human lifetime. You’ll exist, and there will even be people who vote for you, but not in any serious sense.

    Oh bullshit. It’s closer to say that we are the PRI of the United States. Or more precisely, the Bushes and the Paul Ryans are sitting in their haciendas drinking tequila whereas you are some irrelevant “proud” campesino trying to hoe the weeds out of three acres of countryside so that some corn might grow there.

    Why? Because they are the ones who figured out how things work and adapted to it, whereas you are getting and going to continue to get the just desserts of your stubbornness.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross

    Oh bullshit
     
    I await your migrant-cancelling landslides, effected by not saying much and keeping your head down.
    I'll tell you what's bullshit, being demonstrably completely wrong at every turn and still trying to pass yourself off as an expert. Trump wasn't elected by magical Russian hackers or Hispanics who heard a magical combination of ass-kissing phrases. He was elected by millions of people who hate the warmongering tax-raising immigrant-summoning Democrats that the Republicans have become.
    Our problem is not Trump's honesty or clarity. Our central problem is our runaway elites shoving the conversation so far to the extreme left that they are no longer bothering with the Overton window. If main line Republicans offer no alternative to the Democrats then I am happy to see them lose.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mishra
    The Republican Party is as dead as a doornail. You can stick a fork in it.

    Granted many are too stupid to read the writing on the wall, but it's there.

    The Republican Party is as dead as a doornail. You can stick a fork in it.</blockquo

    Wtf is this? Can you read a newspaper on the day it publishes election returns, or pay attention to who's in Congress, or the White House?

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Democrats cheat every time. Republicans do nothing to stop them. Democrats lose when there is a big demonstration of support that throws off the numbers, in other words abnormal Republican voter turnout. Republicans will lose when they do not generate an abnormal turnout.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Issac
    Be that as it may, there is a vast and growing population that isn't getting anything out of the Trump admin and they aren't interested in the neocon GOP either.

    Ultimately, I think you're going to see incredibly low voter turnout for the right going forward until someone takes the implicitly pro-white messaging and puts some effort into making it policy.

    Yes there are going to be worse consequences for your country, and likely mine too given BDS is now surging in the far left along side minority power, because of this wave of disenchantment, but blame can only truly be laid at the feet of the political right that couldn't find anything at all to deliver.

    What purpose is your GOP if they can't or won't improve the lot of their base in the long term and punish the flagrantly illegal and treasonous behavior of their base's deadly enemies? There is none.

    So calumny all the while with this story of how much worse it would or will be, but the state itself can't survive much more of the left. Let the military enjoy being full of diverse and transgender soldiers while China had the world to themselves. If people with actual power in the American right can't be bothered to find their balls long enough to pass the pittance Trump has spoken of, then surely the average right wing voter can't be expected to support them.

    What purpose is your GOP if they can’t or won’t improve the lot of their base in the long term and punish the flagrantly illegal and treasonous behavior of their base’s deadly enemies? There is none.

    I don’t know how many Americans think this way. There may be a lot, but even if it’s just a few it’s a serious problem nonetheless. For those people to whom it applies, they are in woeful denial woeful denial about what elections are supposed to mean.

    For example, there’s polls that supposedly show that 60-80-whatever percent of Americans favor normalizing the DACA participants. That doesn’t mean that is going to happen necessarily, but it does factor in the minds of our elected officials, no matter who they are or which party won the last election.

    If we can’t be bothered to stay loyal to our shared citizenship as Americans, we’re going to get Darwined out of existence, and we’ll deserve it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    If we can’t be bothered to stay loyal to our shared citizenship as Americans

    What does this mean? Does it mean "hold a memory of a funny, three-cornered hat in your head, so you can keep still while Angel begins to cut your neck"? My understanding of my citizenship is not "legitimize my own destruction."
    , @The Anti-Gnostic
    Citizenship is a nominalism. You can plop me down in Armenia, teach me Armenian, give me Armenian citizenship. Doesn't make me Armenian other than as an administrative designation.

    If you want Republican Party policy, you need Republican Party demographics.
    , @MarkinLA
    For example, there’s polls that supposedly show that 60-80-whatever percent of Americans favor normalizing the DACA participants.

    And no attempts to attack the legitimacy of those polls. Nobody ever follows up with questions about their parents if they are normalized. No attempts is made to show exactly how special the Dreamers are (only 35% have high school diplomas from some of the crappiest schools in America). They also use push polls and don't ask the question in any way that would give a negative result such as "Do you really care if the DACAs are deported".

    The bottom line is that nobody is going to change his vote over the Dreamers but the media makes it appear that it is issue number 1 in the country.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @J.Ross
    Maybe we should take Paul Ryan's feelings about our physical safety seriously and campaign as strenuously against the GOP as we did for Trump. A Democratic Congress brings the civil war closer.

    Maybe we should take Paul Ryan’s feelings about our physical safety seriously and campaign as strenuously against the GOP as we did for Trump. A Democratic Congress brings the civil war closer.

    Are you like, a person or one of Zuckerberg’s troll bots? And who’s we, kemosabe?

    I’m talking about the political interests of American citizens which have been represented by the Republican Party since before our grandparents were born up through today. It’s anybody’s guess what you’re talking about.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    So McCain trying to start a war with a nuclear power and colluding with terrorists, McConnell kowtowing to Beijing, and Republicans in general welcoming in as many Democrat-voting Mestizos as they can, represent our interests? The GOP is dead. The GOP put up twenty respectable, Inner Party approved, Luntz tested, establishment candidates, and they all wiped out before a guy no respectable person thought could win at any level. Dems are dead too (Bernie had popular support that cheating Hillary did not) but get carried around as in a funeral march by their new peones. Who's "we" indeed. Maybe there will be a blue wave in autumn, but it will neither be Trump's fault nor the Democrat's work. This spending bill is the "party of our values" telling the only people who think this party should legally be allowed to exist, let alone would vote for it, to violently kill ourselves while aging boomers and rioting gangbangers cheer and laugh.
    We're not going to kill ourselves, we're going to kill your party. These are your last elections. If you can't get it together in this time frame then you can look forward to being whoever it was in Mexico that wasn't the Institutional Revolutionary Party for a human lifetime. You'll exist, and there will even be people who vote for you, but not in any serious sense.
    , @Twodees Partain
    "I’m talking about the political interests of American citizens which have been represented by the Republican Party since before our grandparents were born up through today. "

    That's the funniest thing I've read this week. Tell me it was a joke.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Thomas
    This is probably Trump's last chance to get the wall and, with it, any chance of reelection in 2020. The odds are that the Democrats will take the House in November. September will be too close to the election for the Republicans to take risks with the budget then. If he goes into the 2020 election and nothing has happened on the wall, it'll be his "read my lips" moment.

    This is probably Trump’s last chance to get the wall and, with it, any chance of reelection in 2020. The odds are that the Democrats will take the House in November. September will be too close to the election for the Republicans to take risks with the budget then. If he goes into the 2020 election and nothing has happened on the wall, it’ll be his “read my lips” moment.

    This could end up working out that way, but it’s a failure on our part if it does.

    Objectively speaking, Trump’s record is better than it needs to be for anybody who is persuadeable to vote Republican. So far, we have low unemployment (and getting lower), positive growth, Gorsuch, ISIS defeated, the possibility of North Korea denuclearization, maybe even meaningful wage growth.

    More importantly, there hasn’t been any significant backsliding on any issue relative to the end of the Obama Administration, and there’s a good chance DACA will be ended as well. The negatives are Charlottesville and Parkland, which in big picture terms, aren’t really that big a deal.

    Given all that, we’re still stuck at 40% approval. The problem is Trump himself, his persona, and the perception of instability that goes with that.

    Trump and his enthusiasts have drunk the Kool-Aid hard about hard the alpha-male symbolism and the perception of toughness. But no matter how strong Trump’s posture or persuasive words are according to the likes of Scott Adams, we’re still losing out.

    To a significant extent, strength in politics comes from the perception of permanence, and Trump clearly doesn’t have it. There’s just no way to do a body-language or linguistic analysis and try to pretend any different. We can all see that there are no legions of Trump loyalists with important jobs in the executive branch (or anywhere else in government, or in the punditocracy). We’re all in a position of waiting for the whole thing to finally fall apart like a 77 Chevelle.

    But you know, there is one thing that is permanent in our political landscape, the Republican Party. The GOP has been around in its current form since before the Civil War. Maybe we should be working helping them out and not worrying about Trump so much, because they are going to be around long after Trump is gone. And we’ll probably be needing them then as well.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Maybe we should take Paul Ryan's feelings about our physical safety seriously and campaign as strenuously against the GOP as we did for Trump. A Democratic Congress brings the civil war closer.
    , @Moses

    Maybe we should be working helping them out and not worrying about Trump so much, because they are going to be around long after Trump is gone. And we’ll probably be needing them then as well.
     
    Wait, what?

    The old-style GOP is the enemy just as much as the leftists (perhaps more):
    - They spend, and spend, and spend
    - They love foreign wars
    - They love low skill, low wage immigration which harms Americans on the low end of the skill ladder
    - They sat on their hands while leftists took over our institutions and corrupted our cultural norms
    - They allow the Dems to control them with fake charges of "racist!", frightened of their own shadows
    - The GOP ostensibly controls both houses of Congress, yet we still don't have a wall or immigration reform?

    Please.

    With "friends" like the cuck GOP, who needs enemies?

    , @Mishra
    The Republican Party is as dead as a doornail. You can stick a fork in it.

    Granted many are too stupid to read the writing on the wall, but it's there.
    , @vx37
    That's some classic concern trolling right there. Thanks to demographic changes brought about largely by Republican treason, voting Republican will soon be an exercise in futility, a protest vote, like voting Green or Libertarian. They're not going to always be around, they're circling the drain.
    , @MarkinLA
    The GOP has been around in its current form since before the Civil War. Maybe we should be working helping them out and not worrying about Trump so much, because they are going to be around long after Trump is gone. And we’ll probably be needing them then as well.

    Isn't the goal of the GOP leadership to do nothing and wait Trump out so everything reverts back to normal? I thought the idea was to make the GOP more like Trump. How does reflexively supporting the GOP do that?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • It’s too much to hope for that we’d get a wall. Let’s recall that the key point of a wall is that it’s a concession we make to them, it’s not worth nearly so much if it’s the other way around.

    That said, it would be nice if we could keep the Gateway Tunnel and the like infrastructure from getting off the ground. As it is, you have millions of people, mostly Democrats, spending their time in PATH tunnels going from Jersey to Manhattan and vice versa, which is exactly what they’re supposed to be doing.

    But the most important thing is that all this is pretty small beer. We need to get in a better position than we are for 2018, and I don’t think this makes a big difference either way. What does make a difference is the extent Trump turns off people who would be inclined to vote for him, or by extension vote Republican.

    One important detail that’s been glossed over is the fact that when Trump was flirting with 45% approval a month ago, he went completely off Twitter for at least a weekend. The things that have happened since then aren’t nearly so positive.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • From the New York Times: In ‘The People vs. Democracy,’ Trump Is Just One Populist Among Many Books of The Times By JENNIFER SZALAI MARCH 14, 2018 The title of Yascha Mounk’s new book, “The People vs. Democracy,” makes clever use of what looks like a glaring oxymoron: After all, what is democracy if not...
  • Btw, here is a piece I saw linked from Kaus a few weeks ago:

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-trump-isnt-taking-democrats-offer-for-a-wall/

    I think the author is right, and I give credit to Trump here. And frankly, Trump surprised me in a good way. I was worried that the Pewitt/Coulter types were going to be baying for a wall and itching to accuse The Donald of cucking/selling out on immigration.

    But Trump shrewdly imo, didn’t go for it. He also stood by as the Establishment GOP got the big tax cut through, which ought to keep them onside. He also is presiding over a growing economy, with low unemployment, even signs that wage growth could be starting up again. He’s got all this, and it’s still not enough. He couldn’t hold 43% approval for more than a week, and he’s back down at 41% again.

    We’re at a place where we need strategic improvements, not just tactical ones. And the biggest bang for the buck is shitcanning the President’s twitter.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @J.Ross
    >to create cacophony in the public sphere.
    Oh so you don't understand what he's doing, and expect the Republicans to win while playing by the establishment's rules, which have recently been amended to specify white exclusion. Maybe Anderson Voodoo will be nice to us if we raise our hands and wait politely to be called on.

    Oh so you don’t understand what he’s doing, and expect the Republicans to win while playing by the establishment’s rules, which have recently been amended to specify white exclusion. Maybe Anderson Voodoo will be nice to us if we raise our hands and wait politely to be called on.

    Yeah, yeah, yeah, this is exactly what’s not working for us right now.

    This is not October 2016 any more, and people don’t feel the need to support Trump for the sake of keeping Hillary out of the White House. Western PA was Ground Zero for the propensity for previously nonpartisan or Democratic-leaning white voters to come out in droves for Trump, and we just lost a special election there (with a candidate who defined himself as supporting Trump btw).

    So let’s cut the crap and the tough-sounding bullshit, and take a look outside to see what’s actually going on out there. And then let’s do what it actually takes to win instead of what sounds good on iSteve.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • From the New York Times: The point of term limits is to keep the same people from ruling
  • Mrs. DiBlasio may yet work herself into as much public disfavor as has Mrs. Clinton, but she hasn’t done it yet. So for 2018 at least, we’re on our own.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • From the New York Times: In ‘The People vs. Democracy,’ Trump Is Just One Populist Among Many Books of The Times By JENNIFER SZALAI MARCH 14, 2018 The title of Yascha Mounk’s new book, “The People vs. Democracy,” makes clever use of what looks like a glaring oxymoron: After all, what is democracy if not...
  • @J.Ross

    At that point, Trump is an albatross we need to get rid of
     
    I'm sorry, have you unearthed a previously-unknown store of Republican candidates who are not traitors that make the Democrats look good?

    Any of them really. The GOP has for the most part found the right policy mix, at least until the necessity for cutting spending rises to the forefront again. Given where we are regarding the GOP’s policies and the consequences of them that we’ve seen so far, we should be doing much better than we are.

    This isn’t to say that Trump is doing everything wrong. In fact, I think he’s made a couple of canny moves recently. Specifically, refusing the D offers of wall funding for DACA legalization (I think Kaus linked to some thoughts behind that). But even as that was the best alternative, the overall strategic direction is bad for us, in such a way that we have to outmaneuver the other guys tactically just to tread water.

    No, the problem is Trump himself and his propensity to create cacophony in the public sphere. There’s a lot of people, not all of them Left or pro-immigration or Democrat or what have you, who just don’t like that and are going to vote against Trump or Republicans because of that. But, there were also a strong number of weakly motivated liberals who saw the whole spectacle and were turned off the whole thing and didn’t vote, thereby creating an advantage for the GOP.

    With the PA18 thing in now, it should be apparent that’s not working any more. Their side is motivated to cut through the crap, crawl through broken glass to vote against Trump and anybody in his party. Our side is feeling a little complacent, and a little turned off, and feel the need to vote against Hillary any more because she’s gone.

    That means we have to dial down Trump’s twitter, and dial up the economy, immigration and our demographic advantages in the places where we have them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    >to create cacophony in the public sphere.
    Oh so you don't understand what he's doing, and expect the Republicans to win while playing by the establishment's rules, which have recently been amended to specify white exclusion. Maybe Anderson Voodoo will be nice to us if we raise our hands and wait politely to be called on.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Whiskey
    Good God. It's looking like a Blue Tidal Wave making Nancy Palsi Speaker and Chucky Schemer Majority Leader. Trump is likely removed three or four months after that on a party line vote.

    Mouncks stuff is popular. That's the center. Wanting your own White nation state is the weirdo position for fringes ... White men, married White women. Trump riled up White women in a pussy hat fury plus non Whites and Harris might even be appointed by a Judge on the basis of "I say so" I would not bet on John Roberts stopping that.

    Only White dudes get screwed by mass third world immigration hence no stopping it for sixty years

    Good God. It’s looking like a Blue Tidal Wave making Nancy Palsi Speaker and Chucky Schemer Majority Leader. Trump is likely removed three or four months after that on a party line vote.

    Maybe yes, maybe no. In the House at least, it’s not looking good at the moment. We had a good few weeks a while ago, and I was hoping that we’d kick on from that but we certainly haven’t, and it looks like we’ve regressed a little bit.

    Basically we need Trump to get to 45% approval. At that point, he’s not really the key factor in the election any more. In that case, GOP-friendlier local/demographic factors would take over, and the GOP would hold the House. About a month ago, we were basically one step away from that and heading in the right direction. Now the situation has taken a turn for the worse.

    The reason I mention this is to say that we’re not necessarily that far from where we need to be, but the bigger problem is that we don’t have and ideas or playbook for how to get there. Specifically, the way to turn this around is, stylistically at least, contrary to a lot of people’s inclinations. Ie, Trump needs to be more Presidential, less inflammatory, and needs to lay off Twitter. The Republicans in Congress and the executive branch need to take a higher profile and show more independence from Trump (though not opposition to him). We need to do this before everything defaults to campaign mode.

    Then we’re going to have to go through the whole thing over again for the 2020 primary season. At that point, Trump is an albatross we need to get rid of, and that is the right time to do it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross

    At that point, Trump is an albatross we need to get rid of
     
    I'm sorry, have you unearthed a previously-unknown store of Republican candidates who are not traitors that make the Democrats look good?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • From The Telegraph: 1,000 children may have been victims in Britain's biggest ever child abuse scandal By Callum Adams 11 MARCH 2018 • 4:23PM Up to 1,000 children could have been abused in Britain's biggest ever child abuse scandal, an investigation has revealed. Hundreds of children, some as young as 11, are estimated to have...
  • Let’s note, before this gets too stale and for the benefit of a substantial number of us here who like piss on the rootless cosmopolitans and make profound statements about the JQ, that Israel doesn’t have any Rotherhams or anything of the sort. And furthermore, that Israel doesn’t seem to have problems with the leadership of Donald Trump either. If you’ve had to deal with the bluster and bullshit of Yasser Arafat for 40 years, Donald Trump might not be that bad by comparison.

    The difference in outlook between someone like Harvey Weinstein and someone like Bibi Netanyahu is such that the joke is on us if we try and group them together.

    Read More
    • Agree: Clyde
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • From Real Clear Politics: Commenter WorkingClass observes: Yeah, but he can only go transgender like that wonderfully courageous Caitlyn Jenner, not tr
  • @Anon
    Schumer must have counted the votes already and realized that grandstanding would not give the Democrats anything. There must be enough Democrats with feet of sand to weaken Schumer's side. He just ended up with with angry minorities protesting at his house last time. The two-year extension means that both parties are making sure the budget process isn't going to be disrupted by next year's elections. It's also possible Schumer was told a lot of flyover Senate Dems are up for reelection in 2018 and he needs to shut up. Undoubtedly, Schumer was given some private polling results after the last shutdown, and he didn't like what he saw.

    Schumer must have counted the votes already and realized that grandstanding would not give the Democrats anything.

    Actually it goes well beyond that. The fact that Schumer tied DACA to the budget process is at least perhaps what killed them in the polls in the first place. DACA supposedly polls well by itself. I’m not as sure, but we’ll find out soon enough.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @27 year old

    The Democrats have wanted McConnell to bring up a clean DACA bill for year now, and he’s promised to do it. So they think they have the votes.
     
    They easily have the votes if nobody filibusters. Which, who is going to actually do that? Fake news would be running clips of segregationist filibusters, dogs, fire hoses, etc.

    They easily have the votes if nobody filibusters. Which, who is going to actually do that? Fake news would be running clips of segregationist filibusters, dogs, fire hoses, etc.

    No, there’s going to be a filibuster for sure (unless McConnell promised on behalf of the whole caucus that they wouldn’t and I’m pretty sure that didn’t happen). That doesn’t mean that Tom Cotton is going to be reading the phone book, but it does mean that the Democrats need 60 votes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @whorefinder
    The President knows their gun chamber is getting pretty empty; they've fired a ton of bullets and he's dodged them all. The government shutdown was a huge loss for them, as they realized Trump won't be scared by that, but they will (hence his taunting yesterday about how he'd "love" another gov't shutdwon; he knew the D's would cave and not allow it, and look weak for it).

    it's delicious to watch him slap them around.

    The President knows their gun chamber is getting pretty empty; they’ve fired a ton of bullets and he’s dodged them all. The government shutdown was a huge loss for them, as they realized Trump won’t be scared by that, but they will (hence his taunting yesterday about how he’d “love” another gov’t shutdwon; he knew the D’s would cave and not allow it, and look weak for it).

    it’s delicious to watch him slap them around.

    This could be true but I don’t believe it. It sounds like overconfident bullshit to me.

    This is what I meant with the Senate vote being an eye-opener for somebody. The Democrats have wanted McConnell to bring up a clean DACA bill for year now, and he’s promised to do it. So they think they have the votes. If they do have the votes, we should appreciate that we’re in a different situation than we thought and hoped. And if they don’t, it won’t be because of Trump, it will be because of the grass roots.

    Read More
    • Replies: @27 year old

    The Democrats have wanted McConnell to bring up a clean DACA bill for year now, and he’s promised to do it. So they think they have the votes.
     
    They easily have the votes if nobody filibusters. Which, who is going to actually do that? Fake news would be running clips of segregationist filibusters, dogs, fire hoses, etc.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • OT: The immigration soap opera has taken a couple more turns.

    Basically Schumer has given up tying DACA (or anything immigration-related for that matter) to the budget process. And, he and McConnell have a bipartisan budget agreement that essentially ends the sequester.

    As far as DACA goes, McConnell promised the D’s that they could have a clean bill (or anything else they wanted) and he would bring it up to the floor. But, I’m pretty sure it still has to have 60 votes to clear there. That means it has to get all 49 Democrats (counting the independents) plus at least 11 Republicans. It’ll be an eye-opener for everybody if in fact this happens.

    It will also be interesting to see what ends up being voted on. The Democrats want a clean bill and if they can find 60 votes they’ll have it. But if they’re short, they also have the option of trying to throw a few bones to our side to see if that could pull a few votes over.

    The House should be irrelevant here, and it almost is but it’s not. The Democrats aren’t accepting Schumer’s punt on the budget process, but they don’t have a majority or a filibuster to use as leverage. But the agreement does end the filibuster, and there’s a significant number of Republicans who aren’t on board. If there’s enough of them, then there’s some chance the House Democrats come back into play.

    And, it’s anybody’s guess at all where the President stands. My guess is that at the end of the day something will hit a snag and the DACA’s somehow won’t be legalized. And I think all parties are going to be comfortable running with that in the fall elections.

    Read More
    • Replies: @whorefinder
    The President knows their gun chamber is getting pretty empty; they've fired a ton of bullets and he's dodged them all. The government shutdown was a huge loss for them, as they realized Trump won't be scared by that, but they will (hence his taunting yesterday about how he'd "love" another gov't shutdwon; he knew the D's would cave and not allow it, and look weak for it).

    it's delicious to watch him slap them around.

    , @Anon
    Schumer must have counted the votes already and realized that grandstanding would not give the Democrats anything. There must be enough Democrats with feet of sand to weaken Schumer's side. He just ended up with with angry minorities protesting at his house last time. The two-year extension means that both parties are making sure the budget process isn't going to be disrupted by next year's elections. It's also possible Schumer was told a lot of flyover Senate Dems are up for reelection in 2018 and he needs to shut up. Undoubtedly, Schumer was given some private polling results after the last shutdown, and he didn't like what he saw.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • In the NYT, Tom Edsall, a kind of old-fashioned Democrat columnist, writes: Trump Has Got Democrats Right Where He Wants Them Thomas B. Edsall FEB. 1, 2018 President Trump’s immigration proposal has put Democrats in a bind; they know it and he knows it. Trump’s immigration “framework” — first outlined on Jan. 25 — represents...
  • @Opinionator
    I fear Trump feels the need from his campaign and the Pewitt/Coulter-style reactionaries to get a wall and we’re paying a price for that.

    Yes, this may be an issue. I am concerned it even may influence them to select a suboptimal design for the security fence along the southern border.

    Yes, this may be an issue. I am concerned it even may influence them to select a suboptimal design for the security fence along the southern border.

    That could be, but even that is a second or third tier issue. Overall, if we take as a working presumption that there is going to be a deal, here imo is our motivations which give rise to our priorities:

    E-Verify over the wall. An agreement to build a wall is not the same thing as having a wall. Having a wall is only part of border security. Border security is only part of immigration.

    By contrast, E-Verify is almost all of interior job enforcement. Interior enforcement is only part of immigration as well, but I’d venture it’s a bigger part than border security.

    The Trump Administration has done America a great service in that for the first time in a long time, the mainstream immigration debate is considering our national interest. But, there’s still many a slip betwixt the cup and the lip.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Noah172
    The Evil Party's bitter rejection of Trump's rather Stupid Party immigration offer is both evil and (extremely) stupid. Trump would be in a real bind if the Democrats would just say yes, but they are too accustomed to having their way totally on this issue above all others. At least this negotiation kabuki gets the country talking about chain migration, the visa lottery, and other issues which have been frozen out of discussion for decades.

    Really wish Trump hadn't said "1.8 million" and "path to citizenship." That's very risky in demoralizing his core supporters. He could have just said, "We are open to legal status for a larger child arrival population than the current DACA applicants," and let the Democrats turn him down as they inevitably would no matter what he said.

    If this is method rather than madness (and I'm still inclined to see it this way, given the largely positive action from this administration on immigration), he's brilliant. If it's just madness, stick a fork in this country.

    Really wish Trump hadn’t said “1.8 million” and “path to citizenship.” That’s very risky in demoralizing his core supporters. He could have just said, “We are open to legal status for a larger child arrival population than the current DACA applicants,” and let the Democrats turn him down as they inevitably would no matter what he said.

    Yeah, this. I sympathize with Edsall’s point but I can’t really agree with it.

    Like I said in a prior comment, I like Trump’s idea a lot better as a proposal than as a policy. We’d like to think that the Democrats are going to channel their inner Arafat and muleheadedly reject it. I’m not as sure.

    And while I think this proposal can be improved by Congress, I think the 1.8 million number can’t be walked back since Trump explicitly stated it. And besides the number, this would cause all kinds of enforcement problems.

    To top it off, we’re not getting the one most important, most plausible thing we could conceivably get right away: mandatory e-Verify. If we have to choose between e-Verify and the wall, e-Verify is much more valuable by a long shot. I fear Trump feels the need from his campaign and the Pewitt/Coulter-style reactionaries to get a wall and we’re paying a price for that.

    Notwithstanding that, we’re still in way better shape now than we were a month or so ago.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    I fear Trump feels the need from his campaign and the Pewitt/Coulter-style reactionaries to get a wall and we’re paying a price for that.

    Yes, this may be an issue. I am concerned it even may influence them to select a suboptimal design for the security fence along the southern border.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Commenter Noah172 writes: Then there was the obscure Taba talks of early 2001. If Trump’s DACA negotiating convinces millions of white normies that the Democrats are not and will never be reasonable on immigration (redpills them, basically), Trump will deserve credit f
  • @Opinionator
    What do you mean by "protect the human capital of our citizens"? What does that capital consist of and in what way is it threatened?

    What do you mean by “protect the human capital of our citizens”? What does that capital consist of and in what way is it threatened?

    Most directly, it consists of employment and educational opportunities to give Americans the chance to support themselves and make a life they choose. But it goes beyond that as well. It also consists of cultural stability, where long-held local cultural norms aren’t gratuitously tossed away willy-nilly. Because, in that environment people will be too scared and defensive to do significant things toward their own long-term betterment. And, it consists of a floor of social support, at least in the imagination, if things get really desperate. Ie, that the government, churches, social services, etc., are going to help me instead of trying to end poverty in Nigeria, or among Nigerians living in the US.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • From commenter Another Dad: AnotherDad says: January 26, 2018 at 7:31 pm GMT • 400 Words (Edit-2177723) The mindwar among Whites is more important than any policy change. Trump’s job is to convince the normies that it is “let’s roll” time. Any policy changes that happen are just a bonus. Agree. We...
  • I completely agree with Another Dad’s premises. What he describes is exactly where we stand. Specifically, we need to approach the issue in terms of winning mindshare.

    I’m less a fan of his actual advice. It reads too wordy for me. Depending on how long he talks, the anecdotes he uses, how he presents himself, etc, it might work. I don’t know.

    What I do know is, immigration restrictionists must build on one point to the American people, underlying all negotiations between Trump and Democrats: the Dreamers and other illegals are already here and they are already illegal, and for the most part they have been that way for a long time. So, it’s not the end of the world if they stay illegal for another week, another month, another year, or forever.

    The Democrats and the media are pushing a narrative that if the DACA deadline expires, everything is horrible. We can’t let that get traction. That “deadline” as it were, ought to be a problem for them, not us.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Commenter Noah172 writes: Then there was the obscure Taba talks of early 2001. If Trump’s DACA negotiating convinces millions of white normies that the Democrats are not and will never be reasonable on immigration (redpills them, basically), Trump will deserve credit f
  • Even if Trump’s offer is a “triple bankshot” as you say, it’s a huge mistake for him to even suggest such a capitulation, because of the respectability that gives the crazy open-borders position. It’s as though, negotiating with people who want to destroy the United States, he said, “OK, I guess destroying the United States wouldn’t be all that bad a thing…” He shouldn’t say (much less offer) such things even “strategically”.

    How? I think you’re horribly mis-perceiving things if you think that somehow that open borders is somehow outside the Overton Window now.

    In truth, most immigration liberals are not open borders in the final analysis. But they borrow a lot rhetorically from them to oppose us. In any event, it seems unlikely in the extreme that there’s some immigration Valhalla out there that we can reach if we just hold out long enough.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Vinteuil
    "I mean 'we', the patriotic, civic-minded, Republican Americans whose intentions are toward the betterment of America and Americans, as opposed to the could-give-a-shit-about-anybody-else, useless quasi-American cranks."

    You mean like, say, Jeb? or Marco?

    Or McCain?

    Or Romney?

    You mean like, say, Jeb? or Marco?

    Or McCain?

    Or Romney?

    I mean what I said: patriotic, civic-minded, Republican Americans whose intentions are toward the betterment of America and Americans. It’s not hieroglyphics.

    If you’re not one, you don’t really count for America.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Vinteuil
    What you mean "we," kemosabe?

    Your posting history here is available to all at the click of a mouse.

    What you mean “we,” kemosabe?

    I mean “we”, the patriotic, civic-minded, Republican Americans whose intentions are toward the betterment of America and Americans, as opposed to the could-give-a-shit-about-anybody-else, useless quasi-American cranks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vinteuil
    "I mean 'we', the patriotic, civic-minded, Republican Americans whose intentions are toward the betterment of America and Americans, as opposed to the could-give-a-shit-about-anybody-else, useless quasi-American cranks."

    You mean like, say, Jeb? or Marco?

    Or McCain?

    Or Romney?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @markm
    Part of the problem is that there is still no fear of deportation or prosecution for employing illegals. Then Trump would have more leverage because the Dems would have no alternative but make a deal. Now they can live with the status quo. The invader population pumps out little U.S. citizens every years. They find ways to work.

    Part of the problem is that there is still no fear of deportation or prosecution for employing illegals. Then Trump would have more leverage because the Dems would have no alternative but make a deal. Now they can live with the status quo. The invader population pumps out little U.S. citizens every years. They find ways to work.

    Yeah, as a substantive policy I’d prefer to have a strong e-Verify and nothing else over the Trump proposal.

    But to get there we have to be able to make the case that Dreamers and other illegals have already been illegal for a long time. There’s no rush right this second to make them legal now. And most importantly, have that train of thought be heard.

    As things right now, the Democrats, the media, the activists, etc., have convinced at least a significant number of Americans that the Dreamers is Something That Must Be Addressed. We need to point out that’s not necessarily so, even if you believe the business about “no fault of their own, etc”. Until then, we are still in a weak position, even if we win the occasional skirmish like this latest shutdown thing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @whyamihere
    I have a bad feeling about this.
    Trump seems to have made up his mind that these people can't be deported. Doesn't he realize this will turn America forever blue and make it into Bernie's socialist looneyland?!

    In California today a bill is being discussed that would fine waiters $1,000 and/or put them in jail for six months for giving plastic straws to customers in restaurants without asking first. Politicians like this who want to regulate every part of people's lives will get elected all over the US due to granting all these people (plus everyone tangentially related to them) amnesty.

    I predict a deal won't be made before March 5th and Trump will cave and keep extending Obama's DACA executive order for six months for the remainder of his presidency.

    Seeing those DACA people in politician's offices shouting them down, cussing at them and demanding citizenship really makes my blood boil.

    Politicians like this who want to regulate every part of people’s lives will get elected all over the US due to granting all these people (plus everyone tangentially related to them) amnesty.

    Why are we worried about what amnesty is going to do to our elections when there’s a decent proportion of us who intend to eliminate the middleman, ie, turn around and vote Democratic. If we can’t be bothered to vote Republican as it is, who could give a shit about amnesty?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.