The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 iSteve BlogTeasers
The Eye of Soros
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
Eye-of-Soros

“The Eye of Soros” by commenter Harry Baldwin; concept by commenter Pod fl

If you’re a character in The Lord of the Rings, you don’t want to attract the attention of the Eye of Sauron. Tolkien wrote:

The Eye was rimmed with fire, but was itself glazed, yellow as a cat’s, watchful and intent, and the black slit of its pupil opened on a pit, a window into nothing. …

One moment only it stared out…as from some great window immeasurably high there stabbed northward a flame of red, the flicker of a piercing Eye… The Eye was not turned on them, it was gazing north…but Frodo at that dreadful glimpse fell as one stricken mortally.

Based on news that Ferguson home values per square foot have declined 47% since last summer, a reader calculates:

There were 8,192 households as of 2010. If the average household [or landlord per rental unit] lost over $30k in home value, that’s $245 MM in damage, not including the big losses in commercial real estate. … The ratio of residential to commercial real estate value averages about 2:1, so say the commercial effects take you from $245 MM to $360 MM.

If you’re a nondescript American suburb, you don’t want to attract the attention of the Eye of Soros, since it can afford to subsidize months of protests, media defamation, riots, arson, and mayhem.

 
129 Comments to "The Eye of Soros"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Chang says:

    Great job on the art.
    You should include that image in the tweet.
    Tweets with good visuals get shared a lot more than plain text tweets.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chang
    Of course, tweets posted late at night get shared much less than tweets posted during workday. I think I've seen studies claiming early afternoon tweets get shared the most.

    Ah, here's one claim about best times for social media. Year old. Who knows if it's right
    This says 1-3 pm ET is best
    http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/233567

    This one says 5 pm ET is best.
    https://blog.kissmetrics.com/science-of-social-timing-1/?wide=1

    People I know tend to do social media at work after lunch and before going home as they wrap up at work. They ease out of lunch with some facebook/twitter/etc
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /isteve/the-eye-of-soros/#comment-898676
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Chang says:
    @Chang
    Great job on the art.
    You should include that image in the tweet.
    Tweets with good visuals get shared a lot more than plain text tweets.

    Of course, tweets posted late at night get shared much less than tweets posted during workday. I think I’ve seen studies claiming early afternoon tweets get shared the most.

    Ah, here’s one claim about best times for social media. Year old. Who knows if it’s right
    This says 1-3 pm ET is best

    http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/233567

    This one says 5 pm ET is best.

    https://blog.kissmetrics.com/science-of-social-timing-1/?wide=1

    People I know tend to do social media at work after lunch and before going home as they wrap up at work. They ease out of lunch with some facebook/twitter/etc

    Read More
  3. Toys R Us shutdown last week. The article I read said soon there will be no businesses there without the word “Dollar” in the name.

    Read More
  4. Is there a way to speculate in real estate that would make a years-long spiral of racial tensions and violence profitable for unscrupulous investors?

    And are there forensic economists who can detect such crimes? What do they look for?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Probably not. There are publicly traded real estate investment trusts (REITs) that trade like stocks and can be sold short, but most of them are invested in commercial real estate. I'd be surprised if there were one invested in single family homes in Ferguson.
    , @IA
    "And are there forensic economists who can detect such crimes? What do they look for?"

    Yes. We look for politicians and bureaucrats who benefit from a flood of federal money. Community organizers and "charities" who "reach out" to various donors who "care" also exploit years of racial tension. After all, its imperative to help rehabilitate the people who are victims of racism.

    When, say, a half-way house is built in a decaying neighborhood the developer is allowed to "gift" a sizable donation to one of the many peoples' charities - who just happens to be headed by a close relative of the new mayor.

    High priests of progressivism do well too. They ritually whip the laggards who aren't sufficiently enthusiastic.

    Eventually, it's decided that no-down payment loans will be given to those who don't pay their bills in order to close the "housing gap." So, loan originators profit, and top management at Fannie and Freddie do well too. Ask your current mayor.

    So, to detect who profits from years of racial tension, a recap: politicians, government employees, community organizers, non-profits, relatives of the mayor, and most important - victims of racism.

    As for the flyover shlubs who bought before the invasion, they get a kick in the backside.
  5. The effects of a man who caught the attention of the Eye of Soros can be seen in Glenn Beck. At one time he was calling Soros the Puppet Master and Spooky Dude. Not long after, he lost his show and was called an antisemite.

    Since then, he now says Putin is the most evil man, says that the rise of far-right parties in Europe are a threat to the world and is giving toys and hot meals to underage illegals. Being noticed from the Eye of Soros really changes a man.

    Read More
  6. Chang says:

    Yeah, Beck is the biggest scalp the Left’s astroturf advertiser boycotts have gotten in recent years. They’ve tried StopRush, but that failed. They’ve been going after O’Reilly but are losing.

    But they got Beck out at FoxNews. Beck made lemons out of lemonade with TheBlaze and makes even more money now – but has less influence. Beck was leading million man marches on DC during his FoxNews time.

    It’s like how Stern makes more money than ever on satellite radio — but the culture barely notices him now.

    Beck has softened his image mostly in a desperate attempt to get picked up by the big satellite/cable systems — Comcast, TimeWarner, DirecTV, etc. No luck though.

    BlazeTV got picked up by dozens of tiny rural cable systems. But the big money is in Big Cable, Big Satellite. Comcast has blocked Blaze – probably as a favor to Dems, hoping they’ll approve the TimeWarner merger.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist

    Yeah, Beck is the biggest scalp the Left’s astroturf advertiser boycotts have gotten in recent years. They’ve tried StopRush, but that failed. They’ve been going after O’Reilly but are losing.

     

    I say their biggest scalp was Lou Dobbs. For all of Beck's passion he is still mostly a buffoon who has stayed far away from opposing Open Borders. Beck is the definition of a useful idiot.

    Still I admire Beck entrepreneurial drive in establishing theBlaze.

    Soros' has been funding covert efforts to coerce advertisers into not purchasing time on Rush Limbaugh and other talk radio shows, especially those opposed to open border... Useful idiots like Hugh Hewitt not so much.

    It is the shutdown of internet advertising on Alt-Right website that folks should be most upset about.
    , @Bill

    They’ve tried StopRush, but that failed. They’ve been going after O’Reilly but are losing.
     
    What problem does Soros have with Oxycodone Man and Captain Chivalry? They seem like fairly tame neocons to me.

    When Beck (or Lou Dobbs) were at their height of anti-establishmentarianism, they were tapping into quite threatening subterranean seams. Beck was calling Soros a puppet master and doing TV shows on the Cultural Marxists. Not just uttering the phrase Cultural Marxist but talking about who they were and what they were about.
    , @Maj. Kong
    The Comcast CEO is a big Dem player.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_L._Roberts

    The money in cable is in the 70-150 "basic" packages, I'm not even sure Al Jazeera is in the Top 150 channels.

    The real need is for a la carte cable. The industry would lose its monopoly power.
  7. Chang says:

    I think Beck is funding BlazeTV with his radio money – which is still a cash cow. But for how much longer? Talk radio ratings are declining.

    Meanwhile a TV network like BlazeTV is a money pit. I wonder how long Blaze can survive if Beck remains blackballed by the big cable carriers like Comcast.

    It’s those carriage fees that are the pot of gold. 25+ cents a month from every home in America – whether they watch or not.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ex Submarine Officer

    Talk radio ratings are declining.
     
    Any ideas about why this might be?
    , @Whiskey
    The carriage fees are soon to go. The FT had an interview with the guy who founded and runs Dish. He sees no future in it and is buying radio spectrum.

    See, constant fights over carriage fees as consumers cut cable and espn and hbo offer cut rate internet deals.
  8. I just don’t get the Beck thing – no talent, no nothing. The radio show is just the worst potted radio imaginable.

    I don’t like Ted Baxter (as Rush calls O’Reilly), but I get how people like him. At least here seems to be something there. Now Rush, him I get.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew
    Kanye:

    I don't get Beck either. He has zero appeal to me.

    I still remember listening to him on local talk radio in the Philly area around 2003. The line that sticks in my head was him yelling "I am going to tell you what to think about going to war with Iraq."

    Umm ... no you aren't Mr. Beck, you moron.
  9. BB753 says:

    Maybe that’s Soros’ scam. Drive down property values, then buy them for a fraction of the original cost. After that rent them to the feral underclass, slumlord style, or sell the properties to federal agencies for them to rent to their political clients ( section 8).
    There’s also the possibility to sell the houses for gentrification. Also, when Ferguson properties go down, other areas in the country take a boost simply by virtue of not being where the agitation is.
    Now, imagine using the Ferguson strategy in other places, near big urban centres around the USA. Call it the Eric Holder Farewell Tour. A smash hit around the country! It’ll be worth billions.
    Soros knows something we don’t, that’s for sure. It must be fun to make a killing while playing social justice warrior at the same time. The right should learn a trick or two from this international conman. The way I picture Soros is like a James Bond villain.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Prof. Woland
    Ferguson will become habitable again about the same time Chernobyl does.
    , @Bill

    It must be fun to make a killing while playing social justice warrior at the same time. The right should learn a trick or two from this international conman.
     
    The "right" has its own version. You don't think anyone is getting rich off the US spending more on "defense" than the entire rest of the world put together? You don't think anyone got rich over "financial deregulation?"
    , @ABN

    It must be fun to make a killing while playing social justice warrior at the same time. The right should learn a trick or two from this international conman. The way I picture Soros is like a James Bond villain.
     
    The post-Cold-War Bond films have tried to have modern villains. There was the media magnate in Tomorrow Never Dies, the oil pipeline plotline in The World Is Not Enough, the fashionable geopolitics-of-water stuff in Quantum of Solace, etc.

    I think an SJW financier would make a timely villain. Even better, make him one of those autogynophilic transexuals--George Soros combined with Martine Rothblott.

    (Of course, Hollywood would sooner give the protagonist that treatment.)

  10. Twinkie says:

    That was one fine job of wealth destruction. Well done, Democrats-leftist activists.

    Making almost *everyone* poor is certainly one way of achieving nominal egalitarianism (*excluding captains of the government-sponsored financial services industry and the like, of course).

    Now that I think of it, the so-called Obamacare too has done a fine job of reducing the disposable income of most middle and upper-middle class Americans, and making all the heavily indebted young doctors poorer (which of course reduces the incentive to become a physician, who are in a short supply and will be in a shorter supply still due to the new law), all the while enriching the much tinier segment of the population that runs insurance companies, just so that the government can control all aspects of healthcare.

    Job well done.

    Read More
    • Replies: @IBC

    Now that I think of it, the so-called Obamacare too has done a fine job of reducing the disposable income of most middle and upper-middle class Americans, and making all the heavily indebted young doctors poorer (which of course reduces the incentive to become a physician, who are in a short supply and will be in a shorter supply still due to the new law)
     
    Applications to medical school are at a record high:

    http://www.medschoolpulse.com/2014/09/04/many-people-get-medical-school/

    But there's a shortage of medical residencies:

    http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/blog/health-care-inc/2014/09/growing-residency-shortage-could-overshadow-wsu.html?page=all

    And, a lot of doctors don't want to move to "underserved" areas or stay there long-term:

    http://www.aafp.org/about/policies/all/rural-practice-paper.html

  11. @Chang
    Yeah, Beck is the biggest scalp the Left's astroturf advertiser boycotts have gotten in recent years. They've tried StopRush, but that failed. They've been going after O'Reilly but are losing.

    But they got Beck out at FoxNews. Beck made lemons out of lemonade with TheBlaze and makes even more money now - but has less influence. Beck was leading million man marches on DC during his FoxNews time.

    It's like how Stern makes more money than ever on satellite radio -- but the culture barely notices him now.

    Beck has softened his image mostly in a desperate attempt to get picked up by the big satellite/cable systems -- Comcast, TimeWarner, DirecTV, etc. No luck though.

    BlazeTV got picked up by dozens of tiny rural cable systems. But the big money is in Big Cable, Big Satellite. Comcast has blocked Blaze - probably as a favor to Dems, hoping they'll approve the TimeWarner merger.

    Yeah, Beck is the biggest scalp the Left’s astroturf advertiser boycotts have gotten in recent years. They’ve tried StopRush, but that failed. They’ve been going after O’Reilly but are losing.

    I say their biggest scalp was Lou Dobbs. For all of Beck’s passion he is still mostly a buffoon who has stayed far away from opposing Open Borders. Beck is the definition of a useful idiot.

    Still I admire Beck entrepreneurial drive in establishing theBlaze.

    Soros’ has been funding covert efforts to coerce advertisers into not purchasing time on Rush Limbaugh and other talk radio shows, especially those opposed to open border… Useful idiots like Hugh Hewitt not so much.

    It is the shutdown of internet advertising on Alt-Right website that folks should be most upset about.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chang
    It is the shutdown of internet advertising on Alt-Right website that folks should be most upset about.
    --
    Has that happened? Can you point me to articles that discuss that? I'm very curious if the Left has been able to attack the advertising revenue of alt-Right sites. I've looked, but I haven't found much data.

    Many alt-Right sites have tons of ads, so it hasn't been shutdown completely.
  12. Andrew says:
    @Cloud of Probable Matricide
    I just don't get the Beck thing - no talent, no nothing. The radio show is just the worst potted radio imaginable.

    I don't like Ted Baxter (as Rush calls O'Reilly), but I get how people like him. At least here seems to be something there. Now Rush, him I get.

    Kanye:

    I don’t get Beck either. He has zero appeal to me.

    I still remember listening to him on local talk radio in the Philly area around 2003. The line that sticks in my head was him yelling “I am going to tell you what to think about going to war with Iraq.”

    Umm … no you aren’t Mr. Beck, you moron.

    Read More
  13. Ferguson’s minorities have nothing on that powerful minority, the one per centers of Wall Street whose shenanigans vaporized everyone else in America’s household wealth since 2008 – and got bailed out, profiting mightily from running riot, unlike the hapless denizens of Ferguson – or us.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art Deco
    the one per centers of Wall Street whose shenanigans vaporized everyone else in America’s household wealth since 2008

    Unless 'everyone' had all their money in collateralized debt obligations, no.
    , @Dave Pinsen
    Wall Street got vaporized in 2008. The 2008 crash was, to over simplify, Main Street (unscrupulous mortgage brokers) ripping off Wall Street and Government Sponsored Entities (GSEs) (buyers of debt securities build on worthless mortgages).

    Of course, it's not that simple. Part of Wall Street packaged and sold those debt securities, and there wouldn't have been such a market for them if it weren't for the corrupt GSEs and the government's policies designed to lower lending standards to increase minority home ownership, as Steve has blogged about extensively.

    And, yes: starting in late '08, Wall Street got propped up by the government. But not before Lehman, Bear Stearns and other firms went bust, wiping out a lot of the savings of their executives.
  14. NeonBets says:

    The artwork of the eye-rim spoke to me…whispering into my ear to click on the 1.5 minute YouTube clip of an episode from Everybody Loves Raymond called “Marie’s Sculpture”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    I agree, and am surprised there was not more comment in this area, since while I know it is supposed to be an eyeball, it represents something rather more ..... inviting.

    That in turn, suggests to me that the appropriate clip would be the well known one concerning the Ocular Penetration Restriction Act at the following NSFW URL:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Btw1eh4mitQ
  15. @Chang
    I think Beck is funding BlazeTV with his radio money - which is still a cash cow. But for how much longer? Talk radio ratings are declining.

    Meanwhile a TV network like BlazeTV is a money pit. I wonder how long Blaze can survive if Beck remains blackballed by the big cable carriers like Comcast.

    It's those carriage fees that are the pot of gold. 25+ cents a month from every home in America - whether they watch or not.

    Talk radio ratings are declining.

    Any ideas about why this might be?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hacienda
    Parallel reasons to why Youtube has overtaken TV and movies as entertainment media.

    Roll-your-own videos/roll-own-commentary, better twitter on blogs and social media.
    , @Sunbeam
    " Talk radio ratings are declining.

    Any ideas about why this might be?"

    From my perspective I never listened to it. I find this site very useful and educational.

    I have never learned anything from Rush Limbaugh or any of the others. And Glen Beck gave me the creeps.

    Personally I just think what you hear on radio is dumbed down, whether it is NPR or whoever. So I don't partake of it (same thing with television).

    But another reason might be the internet and digital life in general. I can fit more albums than I could listen to in a year on one jump drive. Would you rather listen to your favorite music, or whatever it may be or Rush Limbaugh? Even if you are ideologically receptive, is it really something you'd rather do than anything else? Even in your car?
    , @Chang
    I think the decline of radio is mostly generational. Younger ppl never developed the habit, they've had an iPod/iPhone all their lives. Radio in general is hurting, not just talk radio.

    Talk radio is still a cash cow for middle-aged and older men, but it looks like a steady decline going forward, so companies are in harvest mode, not invest mode.

    And wireless data is getting so fast and ubiquitous that it's getting easier to listen to podcasts in the car. New car stereo systems interface nicely with your phone.

    There will always be a demand for audio content, of course. I listen to more podcasts these days than I do to terrestrial radio. I only listen to radio in the car when I forget to load new podcasts. Or when Rush is on cause I like Rush.

    But the near future you'll just tell your car "Play Steve Sailer's Podcast" or "Play Anthony Cumia's Podcast", etc, etc and the car will hear you and automatically play the latest episode of your favorite podcast.

    PodcastOne.com has invested in a lot of podcasts. It's all about nice markets with intense fanbases. Right now they have a lot of WWE and UFC podcasts.

    There's an explosion in audio content. And that is taking eartime away from traditional radio. The advertisers are still putting almost all their money in radio. For now. But that will change.

    Future of in-car audio is streaming podcasts over your wireless data plan through your car stereo - all controlled by your voice.

    "Siri, play Steve Sailer Podcast."
    "Google, play Radio Derb."
    , @Anonymous
    I think podcasts doom talk radio. The commercial/content ratio is much more audience friendly with podcasts and you can tailor the content to exactly what you want to learn about. Political talk radio just can't compete with that.
  16. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    So now the Soros’ move will be to come in to Ferguson, buy up the town on the cheap, and then promptly begin to lobby the city for a taxpayer funded Ferguson gentrification project, then buy some favorable media coverage, then sell high in a decade or so.

    Read More
    • Replies: @antipater_1
    Soros will be 85 years old soon. He has little sentient time left.
  17. Danindc says:

    Ferguson protests bankrolled by Soros for 33 million. That’s huge news Steve! Why do I only get 10 results when I type ferguson and Soros into google?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin O'Keeffe
    "Why do I only get 10 results when I type ferguson and Soros into google?"

    I don't know. I get over 510,000 results.
  18. @Anonymous
    So now the Soros' move will be to come in to Ferguson, buy up the town on the cheap, and then promptly begin to lobby the city for a taxpayer funded Ferguson gentrification project, then buy some favorable media coverage, then sell high in a decade or so.

    Soros will be 85 years old soon. He has little sentient time left.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BB753
    Billionaires never retire. Soros is about as old as Buffet or Adelson. Yet they keep going too. Greed keeps them alive.
    , @colm
    He has descendants as greedy as him.
  19. WhatEvvs [AKA "Bemused"] says:

    “Maybe that’s Soros’ scam. Drive down property values, then buy them for a fraction of the original cost.”

    Um, no. Soros isn’t a real estate guy, he’s not interested in anything in the US. He makes his money speculating on currencies n stuff like that.

    So Soros is to blame for all this? I would say that President Obama and Eric Holder and Sharpton are far more to blame. If it hadn’t been for them the rebellions would have been quashed. If a riot happens and no one hears it, did it happen?

    Anyway, I nominate Ferguson for the next Starbucks opening. They now want baristas to discuss race relations with customers. Look it up, this is true. Boycott Sbux. Their stuff is crap anyway.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Soros's foundations list their expenditures here: http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/about/expenditures

    They spent $873 million in 2013, the latest year for which they provide that data. Assuming they spent a similar amount in 2014, it seems unlikely that Soros personally earmarked $30 million or whatever for Ferguson.

    Foundations -- even ones founded by conservatives -- tend to attract SJWs and drift left. It's possible some of the staff members working for Soros's foundations are further to the left and more radical than he is.
  20. @BB753
    Maybe that's Soros' scam. Drive down property values, then buy them for a fraction of the original cost. After that rent them to the feral underclass, slumlord style, or sell the properties to federal agencies for them to rent to their political clients ( section 8).
    There's also the possibility to sell the houses for gentrification. Also, when Ferguson properties go down, other areas in the country take a boost simply by virtue of not being where the agitation is.
    Now, imagine using the Ferguson strategy in other places, near big urban centres around the USA. Call it the Eric Holder Farewell Tour. A smash hit around the country! It'll be worth billions.
    Soros knows something we don't, that's for sure. It must be fun to make a killing while playing social justice warrior at the same time. The right should learn a trick or two from this international conman. The way I picture Soros is like a James Bond villain.

    Ferguson will become habitable again about the same time Chernobyl does.

    Read More
  21. Hacienda says:
    @Ex Submarine Officer

    Talk radio ratings are declining.
     
    Any ideas about why this might be?

    Parallel reasons to why Youtube has overtaken TV and movies as entertainment media.

    Roll-your-own videos/roll-own-commentary, better twitter on blogs and social media.

    Read More
  22. Lex says:

    Soros is one of benefactors for polish journal/leftist sect “Krytyka Polityczna” that once gave shelter to a group of german antifascists who attacked polish historical reenactment group on Polish National Independence Day.

    Read More
  23. Art Deco says: • Website
    @Fran Macadam
    Ferguson's minorities have nothing on that powerful minority, the one per centers of Wall Street whose shenanigans vaporized everyone else in America's household wealth since 2008 - and got bailed out, profiting mightily from running riot, unlike the hapless denizens of Ferguson - or us.

    the one per centers of Wall Street whose shenanigans vaporized everyone else in America’s household wealth since 2008

    Unless ‘everyone’ had all their money in collateralized debt obligations, no.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill

    the one per centers of Wall Street whose shenanigans vaporized everyone else in America’s household wealth since 2008

    Unless ‘everyone’ had all their money in collateralized debt obligations, no.

    After adding "hyperbole" to the List of Things Art Doesn't Get, the list is getting a bit long. Perhaps we should switch to a list of things he does get? A list of things he disagrees with Whiskey about?
    , @anon

    Unless ‘everyone’ had all their money in collateralized debt obligations, no.
     
    The banks lost trillions due to securitization (making them all technically bankrupt).

    The bailouts, ZIRP and QE then stole (and are still stealing) trillions from the public to make the banks solvent again.

    So effectively - because the banks had trillions in collateralized debt obligation and the banks own the government - yes.
  24. IBC says:
    @Twinkie
    That was one fine job of wealth destruction. Well done, Democrats-leftist activists.

    Making almost *everyone* poor is certainly one way of achieving nominal egalitarianism (*excluding captains of the government-sponsored financial services industry and the like, of course).

    Now that I think of it, the so-called Obamacare too has done a fine job of reducing the disposable income of most middle and upper-middle class Americans, and making all the heavily indebted young doctors poorer (which of course reduces the incentive to become a physician, who are in a short supply and will be in a shorter supply still due to the new law), all the while enriching the much tinier segment of the population that runs insurance companies, just so that the government can control all aspects of healthcare.

    Job well done.

    Now that I think of it, the so-called Obamacare too has done a fine job of reducing the disposable income of most middle and upper-middle class Americans, and making all the heavily indebted young doctors poorer (which of course reduces the incentive to become a physician, who are in a short supply and will be in a shorter supply still due to the new law)

    Applications to medical school are at a record high:

    http://www.medschoolpulse.com/2014/09/04/many-people-get-medical-school/

    But there’s a shortage of medical residencies:

    http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/blog/health-care-inc/2014/09/growing-residency-shortage-could-overshadow-wsu.html?page=all

    And, a lot of doctors don’t want to move to “underserved” areas or stay there long-term:

    http://www.aafp.org/about/policies/all/rural-practice-paper.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Applications to medical school are at a record high:

    http://www.medschoolpulse.com/2014/09/04/many-people-get-medical-school/
     
    Go to the original source of the information and parse the data:

    https://www.aamc.org/newsroom/newsreleases/358410/20131024.html

    Now think about the context of increasing population (of both college-age cohorts and the older demographic that requires more medical care). And don't forget the lag between the passage of the Obamacare and its eventual consequences.

    But there’s a shortage of medical residencies:

    And, a lot of doctors don’t want to move to “underserved” areas or stay there long-term:
     
    Yes and yes. This has been the case for some time now. "Underserved areas" now often attempt to attract foreign medical graduates (who still have to undergo residency training in the U.S., a resource that is already in short supply), and some states with large rural areas now allow nurses of various stripes to practice without physician supervision (which is in line with the militant nurses' unions demanding "parity" with doctors in pay and responsibility; one of their current goals is those with nursing "doctorates" or DNPs demanding the right to be called "doctors" in clinical settings). Get ready for a lot more types of "doctors" (osteopaths, optometrists, and now DNPs).
  25. BB753 says:
    @antipater_1
    Soros will be 85 years old soon. He has little sentient time left.

    Billionaires never retire. Soros is about as old as Buffet or Adelson. Yet they keep going too. Greed keeps them alive.

    Read More
  26. Sunbeam says:
    @Ex Submarine Officer

    Talk radio ratings are declining.
     
    Any ideas about why this might be?

    ” Talk radio ratings are declining.

    Any ideas about why this might be?”

    From my perspective I never listened to it. I find this site very useful and educational.

    I have never learned anything from Rush Limbaugh or any of the others. And Glen Beck gave me the creeps.

    Personally I just think what you hear on radio is dumbed down, whether it is NPR or whoever. So I don’t partake of it (same thing with television).

    But another reason might be the internet and digital life in general. I can fit more albums than I could listen to in a year on one jump drive. Would you rather listen to your favorite music, or whatever it may be or Rush Limbaugh? Even if you are ideologically receptive, is it really something you’d rather do than anything else? Even in your car?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chang
    From my perspective I never listened to it.
    --

    Well, if you never listened to it you might not have much insight to why it's declining since you were never in the market to begin with.

    Rush still gets 13M listeners. Hannity gets 12.5M. Beck gets 7M. Those are weekly cume #s.
    http://www.talkers.com/top-talk-radio-audiences/

    Talk radio never drew from the audience that preferred to listen to music -- those people listened to music instead.

    Beck is objectively good at radio. Anyone in the top 5 is, even if I don't enjoy their show. The job of being a talk radio host is to get ratings. That is how you are measured and what determines your pay and whether you survive in the industry.
    , @Chrisnonymous
    Ditto that. I listened to Rush briefly back in the 1990s, but as I recall the show was about 40% commercials. Sometimes fun, but very poor use of time.
  27. syonredux says: • Website

    Jeffrey Goldberg weighs in on Jews and Europe:

    http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/03/is-it-time-for-the-jews-to-leave-europe/386279/

    Naturally, he has to set the stage by reminding us that it’s really somehow still the fault of European Christians:

    The resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe is not—or should not be—a surprise. One of the least surprising phenomena in the history of civilization, in fact, is the persistence of anti-Semitism in Europe, which has been the wellspring of Judeophobia for 1,000 years. The Church itself functioned as the centrifuge of anti-Semitism from the time it rebelled against its mother religion until the middle of the 20th century. As Jonathan Sacks, the former chief rabbi of Great Britain, has observed, Europe has added to the global lexicon of bigotry such terms as Inquisition, blood libel, auto‑da‑fé, ghetto, pogrom, and Holocaust. Europe has blamed the Jews for an encyclopedia of sins.

    It would probably be a waste of time to note that the auto‑da‑fé was used against Christian heretics, and that the Inquisition’s purview was restricted to Christians….

    Yet the new anti-Semitism flourishing in corners of the European Muslim community would be impoverished without the incorporation of European fascist tropes. Dieudonné M’bala M’bala, a comedian of French Cameroonian descent who specializes in Holocaust revisionism and gas-chamber humor, is the inventor of the quenelle, widely understood as an inverted Nazi salute. His followers have taken to photographing themselves making the quenelle in front of synagogues, Holocaust memorials, and sites of past anti-Jewish terrorist attacks. Dieudonné has built an ideological partnership with Alain Soral, the anti-Jewish conspiracy theorist and 9/11 “truther” who was for several years a member of the National Front’s central committee. Soral was photographed not long ago making the quenelle in front of Berlin’s Holocaust memorial.

    The union of Middle Eastern and European forms of anti-Semitic expression has led to bizarre moments. Dave Rich, an official of the Community Security Trust, a Jewish organization that monitors anti-Semitism in the United Kingdom, wrote recently: “Those British Muslims who verbally abuse British Jews on the street are more likely to shout ‘Heil Hitler’ than ‘Allahu akbar’ when they do so. This is despite the fact that their parents and grandparents were probably chased through the very same streets by gangs of neo-Nazi skinheads shouting similar slogans.”

    And, of course, the real threat to Europe’s Jewry comes from Nazi-Islam…..

    The marriage of anti-Semitic narratives was consummated in January of last year, during a so-called Day of Rage march in Paris that was organized to protest the leadership of the French president, François Hollande. The rally drew roughly 17,000 people, mostly far-rightists but also many French Muslims.

    “On one side of this march, you had neonationalist and reactionary Catholics, who had strongly and violently opposed gay marriage, and on the other side young people from the banlieues [suburbs], supporters of Dieudonné, often from African and North African background, whose beliefs are based in opposition to the ‘system’ and on victimhood competition,” Simone Rodan-Benzaquen, the Paris director of the American Jewish Committee, told me. “What unites them is their hatred of Jews.” That day, on the streets of Paris, the anti-Hollande message was overtaken by another chanted slogan: “Juif, la France n’est pas à toi”—“Jew, France is not for you.”

    And let’s not forget the coming Catholic-Muslim alliance against the Jews….

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    "Naturally, he has to set the stage by reminding us that it’s really somehow still the fault of European Christians."

    An easy solution. If whites are a danger to Jews, Jews should use immigration to solve the problem. Not non-white immigration to Europe but Jews immigrating to other nations without evil white people: Africa, Asia, Middle East, Latin America, etc.

    I'm sure Jews will get along wonderfully with blacks, yellows, browns, etc.

    But if Jews come to face the same kind of problems with non-white gentiles, maybe they should be asking if there's something they themselves are doing that rubs people the wrong way the world over.

  28. syonredux says: • Website

    Great comment from Marine Le Pen in Goldberg’s article:

    “The reality is that there exist in France associations that are supposedly representative of French Jews, which have stuck with a software that came out of the Second World War,” she said, meaning that members of the Jewish leadership are still preoccupied with the threat of Nazi-like fascism. “For decades they have continued to fight against an anti-Semitism that no longer exists in France, for reasons of—how should I say this?—intellectual laziness. And by a form of submission to the politically correct. And while they were doing this, while they were fighting against an enemy that no longer existed, an anti-Semitism was gaining force in France stemming notably from the development of fundamentalist Islamist thought.”

    http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/03/is-it-time-for-the-jews-to-leave-europe/386279/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    “For decades they have continued to fight against an anti-Semitism that no longer exists in France, for reasons of—how should I say this?—intellectual laziness."

    I think the Third World-ism is also the carryover from May 68 generation thing.

    And in some case, anti-Zionism in tandem with pro-Arabism is a roundabout way for the French Left to be anti-American and anti-Jewish.
    , @Priss Factor
    "And by a form of submission to the politically correct. And while they were doing this, while they were fighting against an enemy that no longer existed, an anti-Semitism was gaining force in France stemming notably from the development of fundamentalist Islamist thought.”

    Jews don't SUMBIT to PC. They enforce it.

    Btw, Le Pen is misguided in a crucial way. She bemoans that French Jews fail to see that Muslims/immigrants are the main problem and that French whites are the best friends of whites.
    She calls it intellectual laziness.
    But isn't it even intellectually lazier on the part of the French Right to see Jews as potential allies when the evidence is to the contrary?
    Same with American Conservatives. I mean the Jewish elites have gone of their way to hurt white power, identity, unity, and interests, BUT the American Right is still dreaming of an alliance with Jews? Is it made up of a bunch of Edith Bunkers?

    I get sick when both Jared Taylor(alternative right) and John McCain(mainstream 'conservative') do everything to praise Jews and attack Iran/Muslims in the hope of cravenly sucking up to Jews for a dream alliance.

    Enough already.

    , @David R. Merridale
    “The reality is that there exist in France associations that are supposedly representative of French Jews, which have stuck with a software that came out of the Second World War,” she said, meaning that members of the Jewish leadership are still preoccupied with the threat of Nazi-like fascism.

    Apparently Atlantic readers can't be relied on to interpret even the most obvious metaphors.

    But software as we know it did not exist during the Second World War!
  29. One theory. Could Soros have an ulterior motive for driving down the home prices even further than pre-Aug. 8 ’14? In other words, with entire neighborhoods in Ferguson at their lowest ebb ever, he then wait until the protests etc finally at long last subside and his hired protestors vacate the premises, and then with the aid of redevelopment, turn Ferguson into a gentrified inner ring suburb of St. Louis? In short, Soros is merely outwaiting til his hired protestors go home, the coast is clear, and he can redevelop Ferguson into some pristine Whitopia a la Portlandia, parts of Brooklyn, Seattle, etc.

    Irony is that by doing so, Soros would cause the displacement of blacks to other parts in St. Louis County, and thus returning Ferguson to its white totals pre-1990? (when it was ca. 75% white in total population). And of course Soros would realize massive substantial profits in development, new housing, etc.

    Ferguson today, Whitopia tomorrow?

    And it would all be due to the Eye of Soros.

    Read More
  30. Chang says:
    @Ex Submarine Officer

    Talk radio ratings are declining.
     
    Any ideas about why this might be?

    I think the decline of radio is mostly generational. Younger ppl never developed the habit, they’ve had an iPod/iPhone all their lives. Radio in general is hurting, not just talk radio.

    Talk radio is still a cash cow for middle-aged and older men, but it looks like a steady decline going forward, so companies are in harvest mode, not invest mode.

    And wireless data is getting so fast and ubiquitous that it’s getting easier to listen to podcasts in the car. New car stereo systems interface nicely with your phone.

    There will always be a demand for audio content, of course. I listen to more podcasts these days than I do to terrestrial radio. I only listen to radio in the car when I forget to load new podcasts. Or when Rush is on cause I like Rush.

    But the near future you’ll just tell your car “Play Steve Sailer’s Podcast” or “Play Anthony Cumia’s Podcast”, etc, etc and the car will hear you and automatically play the latest episode of your favorite podcast.

    PodcastOne.com has invested in a lot of podcasts. It’s all about nice markets with intense fanbases. Right now they have a lot of WWE and UFC podcasts.

    There’s an explosion in audio content. And that is taking eartime away from traditional radio. The advertisers are still putting almost all their money in radio. For now. But that will change.

    Future of in-car audio is streaming podcasts over your wireless data plan through your car stereo – all controlled by your voice.

    “Siri, play Steve Sailer Podcast.”
    “Google, play Radio Derb.”

    Read More
  31. Chang says:
    @Sunbeam
    " Talk radio ratings are declining.

    Any ideas about why this might be?"

    From my perspective I never listened to it. I find this site very useful and educational.

    I have never learned anything from Rush Limbaugh or any of the others. And Glen Beck gave me the creeps.

    Personally I just think what you hear on radio is dumbed down, whether it is NPR or whoever. So I don't partake of it (same thing with television).

    But another reason might be the internet and digital life in general. I can fit more albums than I could listen to in a year on one jump drive. Would you rather listen to your favorite music, or whatever it may be or Rush Limbaugh? Even if you are ideologically receptive, is it really something you'd rather do than anything else? Even in your car?

    From my perspective I never listened to it.

    Well, if you never listened to it you might not have much insight to why it’s declining since you were never in the market to begin with.

    Rush still gets 13M listeners. Hannity gets 12.5M. Beck gets 7M. Those are weekly cume #s.

    http://www.talkers.com/top-talk-radio-audiences/

    Talk radio never drew from the audience that preferred to listen to music — those people listened to music instead.

    Beck is objectively good at radio. Anyone in the top 5 is, even if I don’t enjoy their show. The job of being a talk radio host is to get ratings. That is how you are measured and what determines your pay and whether you survive in the industry.

    Read More
  32. Chang says:
    @anonymous-antimarxist

    Yeah, Beck is the biggest scalp the Left’s astroturf advertiser boycotts have gotten in recent years. They’ve tried StopRush, but that failed. They’ve been going after O’Reilly but are losing.

     

    I say their biggest scalp was Lou Dobbs. For all of Beck's passion he is still mostly a buffoon who has stayed far away from opposing Open Borders. Beck is the definition of a useful idiot.

    Still I admire Beck entrepreneurial drive in establishing theBlaze.

    Soros' has been funding covert efforts to coerce advertisers into not purchasing time on Rush Limbaugh and other talk radio shows, especially those opposed to open border... Useful idiots like Hugh Hewitt not so much.

    It is the shutdown of internet advertising on Alt-Right website that folks should be most upset about.

    It is the shutdown of internet advertising on Alt-Right website that folks should be most upset about.

    Has that happened? Can you point me to articles that discuss that? I’m very curious if the Left has been able to attack the advertising revenue of alt-Right sites. I’ve looked, but I haven’t found much data.

    Many alt-Right sites have tons of ads, so it hasn’t been shutdown completely.

    Read More
  33. Bill says:
    @Chang
    Yeah, Beck is the biggest scalp the Left's astroturf advertiser boycotts have gotten in recent years. They've tried StopRush, but that failed. They've been going after O'Reilly but are losing.

    But they got Beck out at FoxNews. Beck made lemons out of lemonade with TheBlaze and makes even more money now - but has less influence. Beck was leading million man marches on DC during his FoxNews time.

    It's like how Stern makes more money than ever on satellite radio -- but the culture barely notices him now.

    Beck has softened his image mostly in a desperate attempt to get picked up by the big satellite/cable systems -- Comcast, TimeWarner, DirecTV, etc. No luck though.

    BlazeTV got picked up by dozens of tiny rural cable systems. But the big money is in Big Cable, Big Satellite. Comcast has blocked Blaze - probably as a favor to Dems, hoping they'll approve the TimeWarner merger.

    They’ve tried StopRush, but that failed. They’ve been going after O’Reilly but are losing.

    What problem does Soros have with Oxycodone Man and Captain Chivalry? They seem like fairly tame neocons to me.

    When Beck (or Lou Dobbs) were at their height of anti-establishmentarianism, they were tapping into quite threatening subterranean seams. Beck was calling Soros a puppet master and doing TV shows on the Cultural Marxists. Not just uttering the phrase Cultural Marxist but talking about who they were and what they were about.

    Read More
    • Replies: @rod1963
    Yep, Dobbs and Beck really pissed a lot of folks off who prefer to keep to the shadows and paid for it with their careers.

    But lets not forget Napolitano. He had his own shown and was a frequent guest of Beck. Fox shit canned him when stepped on some Neo-Con toes IMS. I don't know what sort of contract Fox has on him, but he could easily have his own radio and TV show but doesn't. Odd.

    Beck went away after doing pieces as you say on Cultural Marxism and Soros. Dobbs dug too deep into H1-B, open borders, the NAU, Bush's railroading of the Border Patrol and his attempted amnesty and in general making the establishment look like the anti-American creeps they are and when Obama was elected, that was it for for him.

    And as you say they tapped into some serious anti-establishment sentiment out there that the elites prefer to keep suppressed and misinformed.

    Beck though is screwing up trying to go mainstream. No matter what he does he'll never be accepted because of his transgressions. Dobbs did a 180 on many issues after being fired in the hopes of being picked up. He eventually was picked by Fox but muzzled.

    As for Ted Baxter and Rush, they are establishment mouthpieces and are rewarded for that. Their job is to keep people distracted and amused.
  34. Bill says:
    @BB753
    Maybe that's Soros' scam. Drive down property values, then buy them for a fraction of the original cost. After that rent them to the feral underclass, slumlord style, or sell the properties to federal agencies for them to rent to their political clients ( section 8).
    There's also the possibility to sell the houses for gentrification. Also, when Ferguson properties go down, other areas in the country take a boost simply by virtue of not being where the agitation is.
    Now, imagine using the Ferguson strategy in other places, near big urban centres around the USA. Call it the Eric Holder Farewell Tour. A smash hit around the country! It'll be worth billions.
    Soros knows something we don't, that's for sure. It must be fun to make a killing while playing social justice warrior at the same time. The right should learn a trick or two from this international conman. The way I picture Soros is like a James Bond villain.

    It must be fun to make a killing while playing social justice warrior at the same time. The right should learn a trick or two from this international conman.

    The “right” has its own version. You don’t think anyone is getting rich off the US spending more on “defense” than the entire rest of the world put together? You don’t think anyone got rich over “financial deregulation?”

    Read More
  35. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Happy St. Patrick’s Day, Steve.

    Speaking of Irishman, I met Soros at Reagan National Airport a few years ago. I think he was taking the DCA-LGA US Airways shuttle (Terminal C). I had a brief interaction with him in line. He was gracious enough and looked good for his age (nice head of hair). I didn’t acknowledge I knew who he was. We exchanged comments about airport security. He was with a 20-something non-American looking (Eastern European) woman whom I took to be his assistant. Kind of shocked me one of the richest guys in the world is flying commercial.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    His political puppets, like the presidents of many Eastern European and post-Soviet countries and to some extent the president of the United States, need enormous personal security budgets, but he, their puppet-master, does not. I'm sure that even Saakashvili could never fly commercial while in "power" becaue it was too dangerous for him to do that.
  36. Bill says:
    @Art Deco
    the one per centers of Wall Street whose shenanigans vaporized everyone else in America’s household wealth since 2008

    Unless 'everyone' had all their money in collateralized debt obligations, no.

    the one per centers of Wall Street whose shenanigans vaporized everyone else in America’s household wealth since 2008

    Unless ‘everyone’ had all their money in collateralized debt obligations, no.

    After adding “hyperbole” to the List of Things Art Doesn’t Get, the list is getting a bit long. Perhaps we should switch to a list of things he does get? A list of things he disagrees with Whiskey about?

    Read More
  37. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factor"] says:
    @syonredux
    Jeffrey Goldberg weighs in on Jews and Europe:

    http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/03/is-it-time-for-the-jews-to-leave-europe/386279/

    Naturally, he has to set the stage by reminding us that it's really somehow still the fault of European Christians:

    The resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe is not—or should not be—a surprise. One of the least surprising phenomena in the history of civilization, in fact, is the persistence of anti-Semitism in Europe, which has been the wellspring of Judeophobia for 1,000 years. The Church itself functioned as the centrifuge of anti-Semitism from the time it rebelled against its mother religion until the middle of the 20th century. As Jonathan Sacks, the former chief rabbi of Great Britain, has observed, Europe has added to the global lexicon of bigotry such terms as Inquisition, blood libel, auto‑da‑fé, ghetto, pogrom, and Holocaust. Europe has blamed the Jews for an encyclopedia of sins.
     
    It would probably be a waste of time to note that the auto‑da‑fé was used against Christian heretics, and that the Inquisition's purview was restricted to Christians....

    Yet the new anti-Semitism flourishing in corners of the European Muslim community would be impoverished without the incorporation of European fascist tropes. Dieudonné M’bala M’bala, a comedian of French Cameroonian descent who specializes in Holocaust revisionism and gas-chamber humor, is the inventor of the quenelle, widely understood as an inverted Nazi salute. His followers have taken to photographing themselves making the quenelle in front of synagogues, Holocaust memorials, and sites of past anti-Jewish terrorist attacks. Dieudonné has built an ideological partnership with Alain Soral, the anti-Jewish conspiracy theorist and 9/11 “truther” who was for several years a member of the National Front’s central committee. Soral was photographed not long ago making the quenelle in front of Berlin’s Holocaust memorial.

    The union of Middle Eastern and European forms of anti-Semitic expression has led to bizarre moments. Dave Rich, an official of the Community Security Trust, a Jewish organization that monitors anti-Semitism in the United Kingdom, wrote recently: “Those British Muslims who verbally abuse British Jews on the street are more likely to shout ‘Heil Hitler’ than ‘Allahu akbar’ when they do so. This is despite the fact that their parents and grandparents were probably chased through the very same streets by gangs of neo-Nazi skinheads shouting similar slogans.”
     
    And, of course, the real threat to Europe's Jewry comes from Nazi-Islam.....

    The marriage of anti-Semitic narratives was consummated in January of last year, during a so-called Day of Rage march in Paris that was organized to protest the leadership of the French president, François Hollande. The rally drew roughly 17,000 people, mostly far-rightists but also many French Muslims.

    “On one side of this march, you had neonationalist and reactionary Catholics, who had strongly and violently opposed gay marriage, and on the other side young people from the banlieues [suburbs], supporters of Dieudonné, often from African and North African background, whose beliefs are based in opposition to the ‘system’ and on victimhood competition,” Simone Rodan-Benzaquen, the Paris director of the American Jewish Committee, told me. “What unites them is their hatred of Jews.” That day, on the streets of Paris, the anti-Hollande message was overtaken by another chanted slogan: “Juif, la France n’est pas à toi”—“Jew, France is not for you.”
     
    And let's not forget the coming Catholic-Muslim alliance against the Jews....

    “Naturally, he has to set the stage by reminding us that it’s really somehow still the fault of European Christians.”

    An easy solution. If whites are a danger to Jews, Jews should use immigration to solve the problem. Not non-white immigration to Europe but Jews immigrating to other nations without evil white people: Africa, Asia, Middle East, Latin America, etc.

    I’m sure Jews will get along wonderfully with blacks, yellows, browns, etc.

    But if Jews come to face the same kind of problems with non-white gentiles, maybe they should be asking if there’s something they themselves are doing that rubs people the wrong way the world over.

    Read More
  38. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factor"] says:
    @syonredux
    Great comment from Marine Le Pen in Goldberg's article:

    “The reality is that there exist in France associations that are supposedly representative of French Jews, which have stuck with a software that came out of the Second World War,” she said, meaning that members of the Jewish leadership are still preoccupied with the threat of Nazi-like fascism. “For decades they have continued to fight against an anti-Semitism that no longer exists in France, for reasons of—how should I say this?—intellectual laziness. And by a form of submission to the politically correct. And while they were doing this, while they were fighting against an enemy that no longer existed, an anti-Semitism was gaining force in France stemming notably from the development of fundamentalist Islamist thought.”
     
    http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/03/is-it-time-for-the-jews-to-leave-europe/386279/

    “For decades they have continued to fight against an anti-Semitism that no longer exists in France, for reasons of—how should I say this?—intellectual laziness.”

    I think the Third World-ism is also the carryover from May 68 generation thing.

    And in some case, anti-Zionism in tandem with pro-Arabism is a roundabout way for the French Left to be anti-American and anti-Jewish.

    Read More
  39. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factor"] says:
    @syonredux
    Great comment from Marine Le Pen in Goldberg's article:

    “The reality is that there exist in France associations that are supposedly representative of French Jews, which have stuck with a software that came out of the Second World War,” she said, meaning that members of the Jewish leadership are still preoccupied with the threat of Nazi-like fascism. “For decades they have continued to fight against an anti-Semitism that no longer exists in France, for reasons of—how should I say this?—intellectual laziness. And by a form of submission to the politically correct. And while they were doing this, while they were fighting against an enemy that no longer existed, an anti-Semitism was gaining force in France stemming notably from the development of fundamentalist Islamist thought.”
     
    http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/03/is-it-time-for-the-jews-to-leave-europe/386279/

    “And by a form of submission to the politically correct. And while they were doing this, while they were fighting against an enemy that no longer existed, an anti-Semitism was gaining force in France stemming notably from the development of fundamentalist Islamist thought.”

    Jews don’t SUMBIT to PC. They enforce it.

    Btw, Le Pen is misguided in a crucial way. She bemoans that French Jews fail to see that Muslims/immigrants are the main problem and that French whites are the best friends of whites.
    She calls it intellectual laziness.
    But isn’t it even intellectually lazier on the part of the French Right to see Jews as potential allies when the evidence is to the contrary?
    Same with American Conservatives. I mean the Jewish elites have gone of their way to hurt white power, identity, unity, and interests, BUT the American Right is still dreaming of an alliance with Jews? Is it made up of a bunch of Edith Bunkers?

    I get sick when both Jared Taylor(alternative right) and John McCain(mainstream ‘conservative’) do everything to praise Jews and attack Iran/Muslims in the hope of cravenly sucking up to Jews for a dream alliance.

    Enough already.

    Read More
  40. Whiskey says: • Website
    @Chang
    I think Beck is funding BlazeTV with his radio money - which is still a cash cow. But for how much longer? Talk radio ratings are declining.

    Meanwhile a TV network like BlazeTV is a money pit. I wonder how long Blaze can survive if Beck remains blackballed by the big cable carriers like Comcast.

    It's those carriage fees that are the pot of gold. 25+ cents a month from every home in America - whether they watch or not.

    The carriage fees are soon to go. The FT had an interview with the guy who founded and runs Dish. He sees no future in it and is buying radio spectrum.

    See, constant fights over carriage fees as consumers cut cable and espn and hbo offer cut rate internet deals.

    Read More
  41. Neutral says:

    Truth is truly stranger than fiction, whoever wrote those Protocols of Zion would not have conceived that real life characters like Soros or Adelson could surpass even their wildest imaginations.

    Read More
  42. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factor"] says:

    http://buzzpo.com/liberals-freak-republicans-introduce-bill-to-make-english-the-official-language/

    English being the main purveyor of PC, is this necessarily a good thing?

    And given GOP’s political tendencies, shouldn’t it call for Yiddish or Hebrew as the national language?

    Read More
  43. rod1963 says:

    Goldberg’s rant proves the Jews aren’t very wise despite having high IQ’s. It was the Jews who fought long and hard for open borders(along with businesses and the Davos people), demographic destruction of whites and multiculturalism

    Now that it’s biting them on their behinds and the Muzzies are seizing them up for a meal, all they can do support more of the same while blaming white Christians.

    A truly self-destructive lot blinded by hate.

    It won’t be long before most Jews are forced out of France altogether and Britain isn’t far behind given the way their elites have surrendered to Islam.

    Read More
  44. Bert says:

    I pretty much lost whatever respect I may ever have had for Beck (which wasn’t very much) when he jumped on the GOP anti-Putin bandwagon and declared his commitment to fighting hetero-fascism.

    Read More
  45. @Danindc
    Ferguson protests bankrolled by Soros for 33 million. That's huge news Steve! Why do I only get 10 results when I type ferguson and Soros into google?

    “Why do I only get 10 results when I type ferguson and Soros into google?”

    I don’t know. I get over 510,000 results.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Danindc
    Oh NeverMind then. Maybe I was using Dogpile....
  46. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Did Steve just watch a LoTR marathon? There’s been A LOT of references recently.

    Read More
  47. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Art Deco
    the one per centers of Wall Street whose shenanigans vaporized everyone else in America’s household wealth since 2008

    Unless 'everyone' had all their money in collateralized debt obligations, no.

    Unless ‘everyone’ had all their money in collateralized debt obligations, no.

    The banks lost trillions due to securitization (making them all technically bankrupt).

    The bailouts, ZIRP and QE then stole (and are still stealing) trillions from the public to make the banks solvent again.

    So effectively – because the banks had trillions in collateralized debt obligation and the banks own the government – yes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art Deco
    The banks lost trillions due to securitization (making them all technically bankrupt).

    No, they were not. Three bulge bracket securities firms were insolvent (Bear Stearns, Lehman, and Merrill Lynch), one universal bank (Citigroup), one large commercial bank (Wachovia), one large savings bank (Washington Mutual), one large finance company (Countrywide), one insurance company (AIG), and the two government sponsored mortgage maws. There were a mess of smaller firms which were distressed, but these could have been dealt with by the FDIC and the bankruptcy courts with no extraordinary intervention. Bank of America fell into distress because they absorbed the losses of Countrywide and Merrill, Lynch and Goldman and Morgan Stanley were under siege because of general panic. The foregoing (other than AIG and the mortgage maws) received bridge loans which they paid back. For some firms (JP Morgan, Goldman), the cash was shoved down their throat by Paulson.
  48. anon says: • Disclaimer

    I can see enflaming racial issues working as part of a long-term real estate scam in the cities (and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it was part of the ethnic cleansing (aka white flight) of prime locations in cities like New York, LA, Washington etc) where the gentrified value could be many multiples of the ghettoized value but in a place like Ferguson you’d think once it was Detroited that would be it – no way back.

    So I think this is either part of the ongoing New York media thing of covering up the ethnic cleansing of Manhattan by deflecting attention elsewhere. If it’s more than that then maybe the baddies are looking for martial law which might imply the banks are going to fall over again.

    Read More
  49. colm says:
    @antipater_1
    Soros will be 85 years old soon. He has little sentient time left.

    He has descendants as greedy as him.

    Read More
  50. Twinkie says:
    @IBC

    Now that I think of it, the so-called Obamacare too has done a fine job of reducing the disposable income of most middle and upper-middle class Americans, and making all the heavily indebted young doctors poorer (which of course reduces the incentive to become a physician, who are in a short supply and will be in a shorter supply still due to the new law)
     
    Applications to medical school are at a record high:

    http://www.medschoolpulse.com/2014/09/04/many-people-get-medical-school/

    But there's a shortage of medical residencies:

    http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/blog/health-care-inc/2014/09/growing-residency-shortage-could-overshadow-wsu.html?page=all

    And, a lot of doctors don't want to move to "underserved" areas or stay there long-term:

    http://www.aafp.org/about/policies/all/rural-practice-paper.html

    Applications to medical school are at a record high:

    http://www.medschoolpulse.com/2014/09/04/many-people-get-medical-school/

    Go to the original source of the information and parse the data:

    https://www.aamc.org/newsroom/newsreleases/358410/20131024.html

    Now think about the context of increasing population (of both college-age cohorts and the older demographic that requires more medical care). And don’t forget the lag between the passage of the Obamacare and its eventual consequences.

    But there’s a shortage of medical residencies:

    And, a lot of doctors don’t want to move to “underserved” areas or stay there long-term:

    Yes and yes. This has been the case for some time now. “Underserved areas” now often attempt to attract foreign medical graduates (who still have to undergo residency training in the U.S., a resource that is already in short supply), and some states with large rural areas now allow nurses of various stripes to practice without physician supervision (which is in line with the militant nurses’ unions demanding “parity” with doctors in pay and responsibility; one of their current goals is those with nursing “doctorates” or DNPs demanding the right to be called “doctors” in clinical settings). Get ready for a lot more types of “doctors” (osteopaths, optometrists, and now DNPs).

    Read More
  51. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Lost in Time
    Is there a way to speculate in real estate that would make a years-long spiral of racial tensions and violence profitable for unscrupulous investors?

    And are there forensic economists who can detect such crimes? What do they look for?

    Probably not. There are publicly traded real estate investment trusts (REITs) that trade like stocks and can be sold short, but most of them are invested in commercial real estate. I’d be surprised if there were one invested in single family homes in Ferguson.

    Read More
  52. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Fran Macadam
    Ferguson's minorities have nothing on that powerful minority, the one per centers of Wall Street whose shenanigans vaporized everyone else in America's household wealth since 2008 - and got bailed out, profiting mightily from running riot, unlike the hapless denizens of Ferguson - or us.

    Wall Street got vaporized in 2008. The 2008 crash was, to over simplify, Main Street (unscrupulous mortgage brokers) ripping off Wall Street and Government Sponsored Entities (GSEs) (buyers of debt securities build on worthless mortgages).

    Of course, it’s not that simple. Part of Wall Street packaged and sold those debt securities, and there wouldn’t have been such a market for them if it weren’t for the corrupt GSEs and the government’s policies designed to lower lending standards to increase minority home ownership, as Steve has blogged about extensively.

    And, yes: starting in late ’08, Wall Street got propped up by the government. But not before Lehman, Bear Stearns and other firms went bust, wiping out a lot of the savings of their executives.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    and there wouldn’t have been such a market for them if it weren’t for the corrupt GSEs and the government’s policies designed to lower lending standards to increase minority home ownership,

    This isn't true. Just because Sailer says something doesn't mean it makes sense. The GSEs were late to the sub-prime game. Reports by the Fed showed that only 20% of the sub-prime loans were held by the GSEs. The rest were held by Wall Street or banks that weren't able to unload them. This is why almost all the brokerages and many banks had to be saved such as Bears Sterns, Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, Citicorp, and Bank of America.

    The GSE were only authorized to buy conforming loans until very late. Those loans had to be well documented and below a certain amount. That is why you had conforming and jumbo loans where jumbo loans carried a higher interest rate because the GSEs could not buy them and the banks had to either sell them to a private party or hold them to maturity.

    The reason why Wall Street thought they could buy them is because they thought they were so smart that using math they could turn any income stream into a series of bonds with different ratings. The GSEs did not make CDOs out of the mortgages they bought they made much simpler mortgage backed securities like they had been doing since their creation.

    You would think that all those "smart" people on Wall Street would know not to buy mortgages with poor documentation. You would think that with decades of statistics on mortgage defaults that "smart" people on Wall Street would know when to stay away from a mortgage. You would think that but with rising real estate prices hiding the risk, stupid mathematics convincing people they were smarter than anybody else, sky-high commissions and bonuses, and knowing you had Congress in your back pocket Wall Street led the economy off the cliff.

    This constant attempt to blame it on the government or the poor slob who took out a bad loan is getting old and tired and lacks any logic. Nobody was forced to make bad loans. They made them because they thought they could sell them before the first payment was due.

    The GSEs cannot force a bank to make a bad loan even if they are willing to buy them. The CRA did not force any bank to make a bad loan. There were plenty of small banks who did not need to be rescued and they did not make bad mortgages. Banks and Thrifts are the only entities subject to the CRA. The companies most likely to have gone bankrupt in 2007-2009 were the mortgage companies like Countrywide lending which had nothing to do with the CRA at all.
  53. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @WhatEvvs
    "Maybe that’s Soros’ scam. Drive down property values, then buy them for a fraction of the original cost."

    Um, no. Soros isn't a real estate guy, he's not interested in anything in the US. He makes his money speculating on currencies n stuff like that.

    So Soros is to blame for all this? I would say that President Obama and Eric Holder and Sharpton are far more to blame. If it hadn't been for them the rebellions would have been quashed. If a riot happens and no one hears it, did it happen?

    Anyway, I nominate Ferguson for the next Starbucks opening. They now want baristas to discuss race relations with customers. Look it up, this is true. Boycott Sbux. Their stuff is crap anyway.

    Soros’s foundations list their expenditures here: http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/about/expenditures

    They spent $873 million in 2013, the latest year for which they provide that data. Assuming they spent a similar amount in 2014, it seems unlikely that Soros personally earmarked $30 million or whatever for Ferguson.

    Foundations — even ones founded by conservatives — tend to attract SJWs and drift left. It’s possible some of the staff members working for Soros’s foundations are further to the left and more radical than he is.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    it seems unlikely that Soros personally earmarked $30 million or whatever for Ferguson.

    Snopes gives this story a yes and a no. No, Soros hasn't personally earmarked $33 million to support protests in Ferguson. Yes, Soros has given that much through his Open Society Foundations to groups that support the protestors in Ferguson. How much difference does that make? You decide.
    , @iSteveFan

    Foundations — even ones founded by conservatives — tend to attract SJWs and drift left.
     
    Henry Ford would be spinning in his grave if he knew what had become of his foundation.
  54. In ’83 Soros married a woman twenty-five years younger. In ’13 he married one forty-two years younger. He’s certainly busy as a bee, wives, girlfriends, making money, setting up foundations and front groups, writing books, making appearances and giving speeches. Are we certain this Soros person really exists? Maybe he’s just a creation; perhaps there are multiple Soros’ out there, anywhere and everywhere, creating mischief.

    Read More
  55. @Sunbeam
    " Talk radio ratings are declining.

    Any ideas about why this might be?"

    From my perspective I never listened to it. I find this site very useful and educational.

    I have never learned anything from Rush Limbaugh or any of the others. And Glen Beck gave me the creeps.

    Personally I just think what you hear on radio is dumbed down, whether it is NPR or whoever. So I don't partake of it (same thing with television).

    But another reason might be the internet and digital life in general. I can fit more albums than I could listen to in a year on one jump drive. Would you rather listen to your favorite music, or whatever it may be or Rush Limbaugh? Even if you are ideologically receptive, is it really something you'd rather do than anything else? Even in your car?

    Ditto that. I listened to Rush briefly back in the 1990s, but as I recall the show was about 40% commercials. Sometimes fun, but very poor use of time.

    Read More
  56. @Andrew
    Kanye:

    I don't get Beck either. He has zero appeal to me.

    I still remember listening to him on local talk radio in the Philly area around 2003. The line that sticks in my head was him yelling "I am going to tell you what to think about going to war with Iraq."

    Umm ... no you aren't Mr. Beck, you moron.

    Er,what was his opinion?

    Read More
  57. Anyone seen this article or one like it? It suggests there is some widespread corruption in Ferguson. I don’t read the news much, just came across this randomly. In general, I am more apt to believe stories about corruption than racism.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-robinson/the-shocking-finding-from-the-doj-ferguson_b_6858388.html

    Read More
  58. Who do you guys like in the upcoming Mittens Romney vs Evander Holyfield fight?

    Read More
  59. Maj. Kong says:
    @Chang
    Yeah, Beck is the biggest scalp the Left's astroturf advertiser boycotts have gotten in recent years. They've tried StopRush, but that failed. They've been going after O'Reilly but are losing.

    But they got Beck out at FoxNews. Beck made lemons out of lemonade with TheBlaze and makes even more money now - but has less influence. Beck was leading million man marches on DC during his FoxNews time.

    It's like how Stern makes more money than ever on satellite radio -- but the culture barely notices him now.

    Beck has softened his image mostly in a desperate attempt to get picked up by the big satellite/cable systems -- Comcast, TimeWarner, DirecTV, etc. No luck though.

    BlazeTV got picked up by dozens of tiny rural cable systems. But the big money is in Big Cable, Big Satellite. Comcast has blocked Blaze - probably as a favor to Dems, hoping they'll approve the TimeWarner merger.

    The Comcast CEO is a big Dem player.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_L._Roberts

    The money in cable is in the 70-150 “basic” packages, I’m not even sure Al Jazeera is in the Top 150 channels.

    The real need is for a la carte cable. The industry would lose its monopoly power.

    Read More
  60. SPMoore8 says:
    @NeonBets
    The artwork of the eye-rim spoke to me...whispering into my ear to click on the 1.5 minute YouTube clip of an episode from Everybody Loves Raymond called "Marie's Sculpture".

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fZSoiMKW5M

    I agree, and am surprised there was not more comment in this area, since while I know it is supposed to be an eyeball, it represents something rather more ….. inviting.

    That in turn, suggests to me that the appropriate clip would be the well known one concerning the Ocular Penetration Restriction Act at the following NSFW URL:

    Read More
  61. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factor"] says:


    Because almost all blacks vote Democratic, even non-GOP whites in the South feel compelled to vote Republican. Not so much over ideology but race and tribe. It’s more about black vs white than liberal vs conservative down there.

    Many Jews seem to think likewise in Israel. Maybe, Israel would be a lot more liberal if it weren’t for its Arab population. But because Arabs vote for ‘liberal’, even non-conservative Jews feel compelled to vote for the right. They see it more as Arab vs Jews than liberal vs conservative.

    Maybe same idea is beginning to float in the heads of the French. Hollande won because of Muslim vote and white ‘left’ vote. But as immigrant numbers rise, more people might see it as white vs immigrant than ‘left’ vs ‘right’.

    Perhaps American politics would be like that if America were much smaller geographically. But because America is so stretched out, many white Libs in very white states still think mainly in terms of ideology than tribalogy or identology.

    Read More
  62. WhatEvvs [AKA "Bemused"] says:

    They spent $873 million in 2013, the latest year for which they provide that data. Assuming they spent a similar amount in 2014, it seems unlikely that Soros personally earmarked $30 million or whatever for Ferguson.

    Thanks. I’m certainly not the one saying that Soros is responsible for the Ferguson debacle. It seems to be taken for granted that he’s the one backing the demos. I’ve seen the numbers $30-$33M bandied about. I don’t know what the source is. In any case, my heart truly goes out to the homeowners and business owners of Ferguson because I know exactly what they are going through. It’s nearly impossible for me to express how much I loathe our elites – no matter what their ethnic background.

    Read More
  63. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Ex Submarine Officer

    Talk radio ratings are declining.
     
    Any ideas about why this might be?

    I think podcasts doom talk radio. The commercial/content ratio is much more audience friendly with podcasts and you can tailor the content to exactly what you want to learn about. Political talk radio just can’t compete with that.

    Read More
  64. “I don’t get Beck either. He has zero appeal to me.”

    As a younger, East Coast guy, I don’t get most of the conservative culture. It seems designed to appeal to a passionless, bloodless, rootless, identity-less “white bread” America that thinks fighting for it’s own survival is too much exertion, but likes to complain.

    Conservative media tends to be very dumbed down and lowest common denominator, like 1960′s television. It’s really out of touch and dated in all aspects. I guess that why it is mostly consumed by folks over 60 and has almost no influence with under 40 Americans. Fox News is boring as hell as comes across as really smarmy. Anyone who uses the internet can see how Fox present issues and facts in a consistently misleading way. Much of the stuff Fox airs is so ridiculous that just repeating it evokes laughter from most Americans, as the Daily Show exploits ruthlessly.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    Anyone who uses the internet can see how Fox present issues and facts in a consistently misleading way. Much of the stuff Fox airs is so ridiculous that just repeating it evokes laughter from most Americans, as the Daily Show exploits ruthlessly.

    And you don't think the Daily Show "presents issues and facts in a consistently misleading way"?

    I can't stomach Hannity, Megyn Kelly, or O'Reilly, but I find the 6 PM "Special Report" a reasonably good daily news wrap-up, as tv news goes. Sure it has a relentlessly a neocon spin, but I find it less grating than the SJW spin all the other channels put on the news.
    , @SFG
    I feel ya. I'm an ex-NYCer myself (I was a staunch NYC Republican, reading National Review and Commentary in my teenager years--remember, this was pre-Internet--and registering to vote in order to vote for Giuliani and Bloomberg), and have often thought I was a conservative born in a liberal area.

    But the whole trucks-guns-and-football thing mystifies me. I mean, I get the guns--you want to protect yourself from the government and from crooks and wild animals in rural areas. Cool. But why waste gas on a heavier car that gets worse mileage, or buy a pickup unless you are a farmer hauling produce to market? Why on earth do we waste so much energy as a nation on sports when it's science and math that will let us compete with the Chinese?

    I wanted to study the old Western Canon when I had time, and went to a college that gave me some familiarity with it. Of course life took over, but as a teenager I always had some idea of fine suits, marble busts of Great Men, and forgotten great literature, not tailgate parties, guzzling beer, and stock car racing. Maybe I was a Brit in a past life? ;)

    It seems like the left hates the West, and the right hates thinking.
  65. @Dave Pinsen
    Soros's foundations list their expenditures here: http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/about/expenditures

    They spent $873 million in 2013, the latest year for which they provide that data. Assuming they spent a similar amount in 2014, it seems unlikely that Soros personally earmarked $30 million or whatever for Ferguson.

    Foundations -- even ones founded by conservatives -- tend to attract SJWs and drift left. It's possible some of the staff members working for Soros's foundations are further to the left and more radical than he is.

    it seems unlikely that Soros personally earmarked $30 million or whatever for Ferguson.

    Snopes gives this story a yes and a no. No, Soros hasn’t personally earmarked $33 million to support protests in Ferguson. Yes, Soros has given that much through his Open Society Foundations to groups that support the protestors in Ferguson. How much difference does that make? You decide.

    Read More
  66. ABN says:
    @BB753
    Maybe that's Soros' scam. Drive down property values, then buy them for a fraction of the original cost. After that rent them to the feral underclass, slumlord style, or sell the properties to federal agencies for them to rent to their political clients ( section 8).
    There's also the possibility to sell the houses for gentrification. Also, when Ferguson properties go down, other areas in the country take a boost simply by virtue of not being where the agitation is.
    Now, imagine using the Ferguson strategy in other places, near big urban centres around the USA. Call it the Eric Holder Farewell Tour. A smash hit around the country! It'll be worth billions.
    Soros knows something we don't, that's for sure. It must be fun to make a killing while playing social justice warrior at the same time. The right should learn a trick or two from this international conman. The way I picture Soros is like a James Bond villain.

    It must be fun to make a killing while playing social justice warrior at the same time. The right should learn a trick or two from this international conman. The way I picture Soros is like a James Bond villain.

    The post-Cold-War Bond films have tried to have modern villains. There was the media magnate in Tomorrow Never Dies, the oil pipeline plotline in The World Is Not Enough, the fashionable geopolitics-of-water stuff in Quantum of Solace, etc.

    I think an SJW financier would make a timely villain. Even better, make him one of those autogynophilic transexuals–George Soros combined with Martine Rothblott.

    (Of course, Hollywood would sooner give the protagonist that treatment.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    The next Bond film is being filmed, in part, in Mexico. Mexico is kicking in $20 million for script approval to make Mexico look good: http://bit.ly/1BmJxVy
  67. @Lackawanna
    "I don’t get Beck either. He has zero appeal to me."

    As a younger, East Coast guy, I don't get most of the conservative culture. It seems designed to appeal to a passionless, bloodless, rootless, identity-less "white bread" America that thinks fighting for it's own survival is too much exertion, but likes to complain.

    Conservative media tends to be very dumbed down and lowest common denominator, like 1960's television. It's really out of touch and dated in all aspects. I guess that why it is mostly consumed by folks over 60 and has almost no influence with under 40 Americans. Fox News is boring as hell as comes across as really smarmy. Anyone who uses the internet can see how Fox present issues and facts in a consistently misleading way. Much of the stuff Fox airs is so ridiculous that just repeating it evokes laughter from most Americans, as the Daily Show exploits ruthlessly.

    Anyone who uses the internet can see how Fox present issues and facts in a consistently misleading way. Much of the stuff Fox airs is so ridiculous that just repeating it evokes laughter from most Americans, as the Daily Show exploits ruthlessly.

    And you don’t think the Daily Show “presents issues and facts in a consistently misleading way”?

    I can’t stomach Hannity, Megyn Kelly, or O’Reilly, but I find the 6 PM “Special Report” a reasonably good daily news wrap-up, as tv news goes. Sure it has a relentlessly a neocon spin, but I find it less grating than the SJW spin all the other channels put on the news.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    You know, I don't even bother with TV news anymore, and I'd encourage everyone here to do the same. In the half-hour it would take you to watch, you can get the MSM spin, and their debunkers for counterpoint, on the web.
  68. SFG says:
    @Lackawanna
    "I don’t get Beck either. He has zero appeal to me."

    As a younger, East Coast guy, I don't get most of the conservative culture. It seems designed to appeal to a passionless, bloodless, rootless, identity-less "white bread" America that thinks fighting for it's own survival is too much exertion, but likes to complain.

    Conservative media tends to be very dumbed down and lowest common denominator, like 1960's television. It's really out of touch and dated in all aspects. I guess that why it is mostly consumed by folks over 60 and has almost no influence with under 40 Americans. Fox News is boring as hell as comes across as really smarmy. Anyone who uses the internet can see how Fox present issues and facts in a consistently misleading way. Much of the stuff Fox airs is so ridiculous that just repeating it evokes laughter from most Americans, as the Daily Show exploits ruthlessly.

    I feel ya. I’m an ex-NYCer myself (I was a staunch NYC Republican, reading National Review and Commentary in my teenager years–remember, this was pre-Internet–and registering to vote in order to vote for Giuliani and Bloomberg), and have often thought I was a conservative born in a liberal area.

    But the whole trucks-guns-and-football thing mystifies me. I mean, I get the guns–you want to protect yourself from the government and from crooks and wild animals in rural areas. Cool. But why waste gas on a heavier car that gets worse mileage, or buy a pickup unless you are a farmer hauling produce to market? Why on earth do we waste so much energy as a nation on sports when it’s science and math that will let us compete with the Chinese?

    I wanted to study the old Western Canon when I had time, and went to a college that gave me some familiarity with it. Of course life took over, but as a teenager I always had some idea of fine suits, marble busts of Great Men, and forgotten great literature, not tailgate parties, guzzling beer, and stock car racing. Maybe I was a Brit in a past life? ;)

    It seems like the left hates the West, and the right hates thinking.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ABN
    Yeah, I'm from a Blue State super-zip and some of the "Red State" lifestyle goes over my head. It's not that I'm against "tailgate parties, guzzling beer, and stock car racing;" rather, that stuff is mostly not a part of my background.

    In general, the right would be better off being more populist in substance and less populist in form. I'd love to see a tweedy Enoch Powell type emerge as a conservative leader. I think a lot of liberals would be terrified to confront a Crimethinker who is also conversant in high culture. It contradicts their whole "To Kill a Mockingbird" worldview of genteel liberals saving righteous victims from the clutches of white-trash proles.

    More philosophically, conservatism shouldn't be opposed to elitism as such, although it should certainly be opposed to the elites we currently have. "For the people" is more important than "of the people."
    , @Twinkie

    But the whole trucks-guns-and-football thing mystifies me.
     
    I went to high school in NYC (the old Stuyvesant HS), but now loathe big cities. Here is my answer about "guns, trucks, and football."

    Guns you know already (or you think you know - it's partly the practical stuff, but it's also more atavistic than that - weapons mean power and freedom).

    Trucks. Easy. Very practical for dealing with occasionally bad weather/roads. Excellent for hauling all kinds of stuff from the said guns above to dead animals, kids' bikes, etc. Small electric/hybrid cars are not conducive to a rural/exurban life with lots of kids, outdoor activities, hunting, etc.

    Football. I am not a big fan of football (I only care about combat sports), but I respect it and participate in its celebration, because in many small towns football along with church service/mass is a communal event. In many small towns and even many suburban areas, practically the whole town shows up for the local high school games. It builds social cohesion and reinforces the town identity.

    Why on earth do we waste so much energy as a nation on sports when it’s science and math that will let us compete with the Chinese?
     
    Looks like Chinese kids can use some sports: http://www.seattletimes.com/news/too-soft-recruits-hindering-chinas-army/

    the right hates thinking
     
    The grassroots of the right tend not to over-intellectualize things. If you were a Burkean as I am, you would know that conservatism is not an ideology but an instinct. Call it the simple, practical, timeless wisdom of the yeomanry, the bedrock of any English-founded society.

    The right has its own intellectual class, to be sure, but tends not to revere it as the left does its own. I think that is rather healthy.

    as a teenager I always had some idea of fine suits, marble busts of Great Men, and forgotten great literature, not tailgate parties, guzzling beer, and stock car racing. Maybe I was a Brit in a past life?
     
    Look, I have Savile Row and Neapolitan bespoke suits. But the whole idea of conservatism as English bespoke tailoring and marble busts is an affectation, not real conservatism of real community. Besides, drinking beers and appreciating stock car racing is in no way incompatible with being well-read.

    One of the interesting things I find about people who veer from HBD to (white) ethno-nationalism is that, invariably, they are people who lack real, organic community in their lives. So they try to construct one artificially (usually over the Net) based on an ideology of ethno-purism and separatism. People (especially whites) who come from robust, intact communities of families, churches, town football games, and hunting/drinking buddies are not easily swayed by such racial fundamentalism, because they do not need the latter to feel a part of something larger than their individual selves.
  69. Meanwhile – Starbucks’ conversation about race off to a rough start

    http://www.statesman.com/news/news/national/starbucks-race-together-campaign-rough-start/nkYcc/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    Bizarre!

    Before this week's campaign, [Starbucks] CEO Howard Schultz held employee meetings on racial inequality in December after the killings of Michael Brown in Ferguson and Eric Garner in New York.


    I'd love to hear Howard Schulz explain why he believes Michael Brown didn't get exactly what he had coming to him.

    One of the reasons the left has gone nuts is its belief in tolerance as the highest virtue. As a result, we have a tolerance competition. Proof of one's ideological superiority can only be demonstrated by tolerating those whom backward Americans still refuse to tolerate. Accepting black people is not enough. An incorrigibly racist America elected a black president, didn't it, so what does it prove? Only that embracing Obama is too easy. We must tolerate the intolerable! Not just the average black person, but black thugs too! Embrace Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown, and point and sputter at anyone so racist that they would dare criticize them.
  70. Where is the evidence that Soros is having an impact on any social movement or democrat politics? I doubt he is for Hillary yet she has no credible challengers. And, yeah, I have read there are professionals, behind the scenes, at the black protest rallies – but would things be any different without him? I doubt it.

    Read More
  71. SFG says:
    @Harry Baldwin
    Anyone who uses the internet can see how Fox present issues and facts in a consistently misleading way. Much of the stuff Fox airs is so ridiculous that just repeating it evokes laughter from most Americans, as the Daily Show exploits ruthlessly.

    And you don't think the Daily Show "presents issues and facts in a consistently misleading way"?

    I can't stomach Hannity, Megyn Kelly, or O'Reilly, but I find the 6 PM "Special Report" a reasonably good daily news wrap-up, as tv news goes. Sure it has a relentlessly a neocon spin, but I find it less grating than the SJW spin all the other channels put on the news.

    You know, I don’t even bother with TV news anymore, and I’d encourage everyone here to do the same. In the half-hour it would take you to watch, you can get the MSM spin, and their debunkers for counterpoint, on the web.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    You know, I don’t even bother with TV news anymore, and I’d encourage everyone here to do the same.

    I make my decisions about what to watch or not watch for reasons of my own. For one thing, I'm interested in what's being said, whether on Fox News or "All Things Considered," and don't take it at face value.
  72. ABN says:
    @SFG
    I feel ya. I'm an ex-NYCer myself (I was a staunch NYC Republican, reading National Review and Commentary in my teenager years--remember, this was pre-Internet--and registering to vote in order to vote for Giuliani and Bloomberg), and have often thought I was a conservative born in a liberal area.

    But the whole trucks-guns-and-football thing mystifies me. I mean, I get the guns--you want to protect yourself from the government and from crooks and wild animals in rural areas. Cool. But why waste gas on a heavier car that gets worse mileage, or buy a pickup unless you are a farmer hauling produce to market? Why on earth do we waste so much energy as a nation on sports when it's science and math that will let us compete with the Chinese?

    I wanted to study the old Western Canon when I had time, and went to a college that gave me some familiarity with it. Of course life took over, but as a teenager I always had some idea of fine suits, marble busts of Great Men, and forgotten great literature, not tailgate parties, guzzling beer, and stock car racing. Maybe I was a Brit in a past life? ;)

    It seems like the left hates the West, and the right hates thinking.

    Yeah, I’m from a Blue State super-zip and some of the “Red State” lifestyle goes over my head. It’s not that I’m against “tailgate parties, guzzling beer, and stock car racing;” rather, that stuff is mostly not a part of my background.

    In general, the right would be better off being more populist in substance and less populist in form. I’d love to see a tweedy Enoch Powell type emerge as a conservative leader. I think a lot of liberals would be terrified to confront a Crimethinker who is also conversant in high culture. It contradicts their whole “To Kill a Mockingbird” worldview of genteel liberals saving righteous victims from the clutches of white-trash proles.

    More philosophically, conservatism shouldn’t be opposed to elitism as such, although it should certainly be opposed to the elites we currently have. “For the people” is more important than “of the people.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFg
    I think the Right knows what it's doing in terms of winning elections, it's just too bad it means it has to turn its back on the intellectual heritage of the West in terms of doing so. Whatever my issues with Counter Currents, they do bring up some fascinating forgotten writers.

    The whole high culture thing turns off too many Americans, that's why they don't do it. I just think it's kind of a pity nobody's sticking up for it. Say what you will about the French, they know their history and culture and value it. I hate to see them drop below the Mohammedan waves.

    I think it might be more fun as a blog. Take a forgotten writer from the 1950s or 1850s every week and do a blurb on him, like Moldbug with Froude. With Google Books, it's a lot easier than it used to be.

    I'm not against tailgate parties, guzzling beer, and stock car racing either, just not my thing and makes me feel out of place. I don't mind if other people do it. Just because I think skydiving is a silly risky thing to do doesn't mean I think it should be banned. It's a big, big country after all. I don't want to own a gun--I'm too convinced I'd blow my own head off--but that doesn't mean I think nobody should have one.
    , @Ex Submarine Officer

    I think a lot of liberals would be terrified to confront a Crimethinker who is also conversant in high culture.
     
    The times that the discussion has turned towards taboo topics with liberals, as we approach a hot zone, I'll just say something neutrally like, "well, there is a lot of science/facts on that subject that isn't very PC at all" and leave it at that (as opposed to being an advocate,etc). Nearly always, the other person will want to venture into such topics and if you can keep yourself as a dispassionate examiner of facts rather than someone with an agenda looking for supporting evidence, you can sometimes have a reasoned discussion.

    It has worked for me, perhaps at least because I've never gone out looking for people to argue with, rather just incidentally strayed in such topics and truly didn't care whether we discussed them or not. Insouciance goes a long way in a lot of activities.

    Another thing I'll occasionally say is "things you aren't allowed to say or discuss in the U.S. these days", again, very casually as if observing whether it is cloudy or sunny outside. Since I live outside the U.S., that sort of validates me, I guess, and deep down, everyone knows there is a massive speech suppression regime in the U.S. these days, at least at a social level. Sometimes it is a relief for people to be able to casually acknowledge this, even if they've been supporters/enablers of it.

    The trick seems to be not giving any indication that one is a "hater" or motivated by such, which, again, is easy for me since it is true - While I find the situation interesting, perhaps in the manner of watching an anthill or something, I actually don't care enough about any of the contending groups in the U.S., left/right, white/black, jew/gentile, straight/gay, to muster hate or affection for any of them.
  73. wren says:
    @Ezra
    http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/03/mickey-kaus-quits-daily-caller-after-tucker-carlson-204135.html

    From a reader’s POV, it woud be nice to see Mickey and Steve on the same site somewhere.

    Read More
  74. iSteveFan says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    Soros's foundations list their expenditures here: http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/about/expenditures

    They spent $873 million in 2013, the latest year for which they provide that data. Assuming they spent a similar amount in 2014, it seems unlikely that Soros personally earmarked $30 million or whatever for Ferguson.

    Foundations -- even ones founded by conservatives -- tend to attract SJWs and drift left. It's possible some of the staff members working for Soros's foundations are further to the left and more radical than he is.

    Foundations — even ones founded by conservatives — tend to attract SJWs and drift left.

    Henry Ford would be spinning in his grave if he knew what had become of his foundation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @wren
    Not just Ford. Most of the original robber barons' foundations now support things I am sure they would have fought against.

    Future conservatives (or whatever they will be) will probably be complaining about the left-wing Koch Foundation undermining what is left of the country.

    I wonder if any of those early industrialists made charters for their trusts.

  75. Twinkie says:
    @SFG
    I feel ya. I'm an ex-NYCer myself (I was a staunch NYC Republican, reading National Review and Commentary in my teenager years--remember, this was pre-Internet--and registering to vote in order to vote for Giuliani and Bloomberg), and have often thought I was a conservative born in a liberal area.

    But the whole trucks-guns-and-football thing mystifies me. I mean, I get the guns--you want to protect yourself from the government and from crooks and wild animals in rural areas. Cool. But why waste gas on a heavier car that gets worse mileage, or buy a pickup unless you are a farmer hauling produce to market? Why on earth do we waste so much energy as a nation on sports when it's science and math that will let us compete with the Chinese?

    I wanted to study the old Western Canon when I had time, and went to a college that gave me some familiarity with it. Of course life took over, but as a teenager I always had some idea of fine suits, marble busts of Great Men, and forgotten great literature, not tailgate parties, guzzling beer, and stock car racing. Maybe I was a Brit in a past life? ;)

    It seems like the left hates the West, and the right hates thinking.

    But the whole trucks-guns-and-football thing mystifies me.

    I went to high school in NYC (the old Stuyvesant HS), but now loathe big cities. Here is my answer about “guns, trucks, and football.”

    Guns you know already (or you think you know – it’s partly the practical stuff, but it’s also more atavistic than that – weapons mean power and freedom).

    Trucks. Easy. Very practical for dealing with occasionally bad weather/roads. Excellent for hauling all kinds of stuff from the said guns above to dead animals, kids’ bikes, etc. Small electric/hybrid cars are not conducive to a rural/exurban life with lots of kids, outdoor activities, hunting, etc.

    Football. I am not a big fan of football (I only care about combat sports), but I respect it and participate in its celebration, because in many small towns football along with church service/mass is a communal event. In many small towns and even many suburban areas, practically the whole town shows up for the local high school games. It builds social cohesion and reinforces the town identity.

    Why on earth do we waste so much energy as a nation on sports when it’s science and math that will let us compete with the Chinese?

    Looks like Chinese kids can use some sports: http://www.seattletimes.com/news/too-soft-recruits-hindering-chinas-army/

    the right hates thinking

    The grassroots of the right tend not to over-intellectualize things. If you were a Burkean as I am, you would know that conservatism is not an ideology but an instinct. Call it the simple, practical, timeless wisdom of the yeomanry, the bedrock of any English-founded society.

    The right has its own intellectual class, to be sure, but tends not to revere it as the left does its own. I think that is rather healthy.

    as a teenager I always had some idea of fine suits, marble busts of Great Men, and forgotten great literature, not tailgate parties, guzzling beer, and stock car racing. Maybe I was a Brit in a past life?

    Look, I have Savile Row and Neapolitan bespoke suits. But the whole idea of conservatism as English bespoke tailoring and marble busts is an affectation, not real conservatism of real community. Besides, drinking beers and appreciating stock car racing is in no way incompatible with being well-read.

    One of the interesting things I find about people who veer from HBD to (white) ethno-nationalism is that, invariably, they are people who lack real, organic community in their lives. So they try to construct one artificially (usually over the Net) based on an ideology of ethno-purism and separatism. People (especially whites) who come from robust, intact communities of families, churches, town football games, and hunting/drinking buddies are not easily swayed by such racial fundamentalism, because they do not need the latter to feel a part of something larger than their individual selves.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    Awesome comment, twinkie.

    "The grassroots of the right tend not to over-intellectualize things. If you were a Burkean as I am, you would know that conservatism is not an ideology but an instinct. Call it the simple, practical, timeless wisdom of the yeomanry, the bedrock of any English-founded society."

    In other words, hobbits. If you're hating on hobbits, it's time to take stock of your worldview.
    , @Jim Don Bob
    +1. Well said. Small town America still has a sense of community, and high school sports are a big part of it.
    , @fnn
    "One of the interesting things I find about people who veer from HBD to (white) ethno-nationalism is that, invariably, they are people who lack real, organic community in their lives. "

    I think it was Robert Stark (in one of his podcasts) who said that WNs come disproportionately from California.
    , @matt
    If you were a Burkean as I am, you would know that conservatism is not an ideology but an instinct

    What silly, conceited blather. Burke was highly ideological. Conservatives have always been ideological.
  76. SFg says:
    @ABN
    Yeah, I'm from a Blue State super-zip and some of the "Red State" lifestyle goes over my head. It's not that I'm against "tailgate parties, guzzling beer, and stock car racing;" rather, that stuff is mostly not a part of my background.

    In general, the right would be better off being more populist in substance and less populist in form. I'd love to see a tweedy Enoch Powell type emerge as a conservative leader. I think a lot of liberals would be terrified to confront a Crimethinker who is also conversant in high culture. It contradicts their whole "To Kill a Mockingbird" worldview of genteel liberals saving righteous victims from the clutches of white-trash proles.

    More philosophically, conservatism shouldn't be opposed to elitism as such, although it should certainly be opposed to the elites we currently have. "For the people" is more important than "of the people."

    I think the Right knows what it’s doing in terms of winning elections, it’s just too bad it means it has to turn its back on the intellectual heritage of the West in terms of doing so. Whatever my issues with Counter Currents, they do bring up some fascinating forgotten writers.

    The whole high culture thing turns off too many Americans, that’s why they don’t do it. I just think it’s kind of a pity nobody’s sticking up for it. Say what you will about the French, they know their history and culture and value it. I hate to see them drop below the Mohammedan waves.

    I think it might be more fun as a blog. Take a forgotten writer from the 1950s or 1850s every week and do a blurb on him, like Moldbug with Froude. With Google Books, it’s a lot easier than it used to be.

    I’m not against tailgate parties, guzzling beer, and stock car racing either, just not my thing and makes me feel out of place. I don’t mind if other people do it. Just because I think skydiving is a silly risky thing to do doesn’t mean I think it should be banned. It’s a big, big country after all. I don’t want to own a gun–I’m too convinced I’d blow my own head off–but that doesn’t mean I think nobody should have one.

    Read More
  77. wren says:
    @iSteveFan

    Foundations — even ones founded by conservatives — tend to attract SJWs and drift left.
     
    Henry Ford would be spinning in his grave if he knew what had become of his foundation.

    Not just Ford. Most of the original robber barons’ foundations now support things I am sure they would have fought against.

    Future conservatives (or whatever they will be) will probably be complaining about the left-wing Koch Foundation undermining what is left of the country.

    I wonder if any of those early industrialists made charters for their trusts.

    Read More
  78. Danindc says:
    @Kevin O'Keeffe
    "Why do I only get 10 results when I type ferguson and Soros into google?"

    I don't know. I get over 510,000 results.

    Oh NeverMind then. Maybe I was using Dogpile….

    Read More
  79. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Anonymous
    Happy St. Patrick's Day, Steve.

    Speaking of Irishman, I met Soros at Reagan National Airport a few years ago. I think he was taking the DCA-LGA US Airways shuttle (Terminal C). I had a brief interaction with him in line. He was gracious enough and looked good for his age (nice head of hair). I didn't acknowledge I knew who he was. We exchanged comments about airport security. He was with a 20-something non-American looking (Eastern European) woman whom I took to be his assistant. Kind of shocked me one of the richest guys in the world is flying commercial.

    His political puppets, like the presidents of many Eastern European and post-Soviet countries and to some extent the president of the United States, need enormous personal security budgets, but he, their puppet-master, does not. I’m sure that even Saakashvili could never fly commercial while in “power” becaue it was too dangerous for him to do that.

    Read More
  80. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @ABN

    It must be fun to make a killing while playing social justice warrior at the same time. The right should learn a trick or two from this international conman. The way I picture Soros is like a James Bond villain.
     
    The post-Cold-War Bond films have tried to have modern villains. There was the media magnate in Tomorrow Never Dies, the oil pipeline plotline in The World Is Not Enough, the fashionable geopolitics-of-water stuff in Quantum of Solace, etc.

    I think an SJW financier would make a timely villain. Even better, make him one of those autogynophilic transexuals--George Soros combined with Martine Rothblott.

    (Of course, Hollywood would sooner give the protagonist that treatment.)

    The next Bond film is being filmed, in part, in Mexico. Mexico is kicking in $20 million for script approval to make Mexico look good: http://bit.ly/1BmJxVy

    Read More
  81. @ABN
    Yeah, I'm from a Blue State super-zip and some of the "Red State" lifestyle goes over my head. It's not that I'm against "tailgate parties, guzzling beer, and stock car racing;" rather, that stuff is mostly not a part of my background.

    In general, the right would be better off being more populist in substance and less populist in form. I'd love to see a tweedy Enoch Powell type emerge as a conservative leader. I think a lot of liberals would be terrified to confront a Crimethinker who is also conversant in high culture. It contradicts their whole "To Kill a Mockingbird" worldview of genteel liberals saving righteous victims from the clutches of white-trash proles.

    More philosophically, conservatism shouldn't be opposed to elitism as such, although it should certainly be opposed to the elites we currently have. "For the people" is more important than "of the people."

    I think a lot of liberals would be terrified to confront a Crimethinker who is also conversant in high culture.

    The times that the discussion has turned towards taboo topics with liberals, as we approach a hot zone, I’ll just say something neutrally like, “well, there is a lot of science/facts on that subject that isn’t very PC at all” and leave it at that (as opposed to being an advocate,etc). Nearly always, the other person will want to venture into such topics and if you can keep yourself as a dispassionate examiner of facts rather than someone with an agenda looking for supporting evidence, you can sometimes have a reasoned discussion.

    It has worked for me, perhaps at least because I’ve never gone out looking for people to argue with, rather just incidentally strayed in such topics and truly didn’t care whether we discussed them or not. Insouciance goes a long way in a lot of activities.

    Another thing I’ll occasionally say is “things you aren’t allowed to say or discuss in the U.S. these days”, again, very casually as if observing whether it is cloudy or sunny outside. Since I live outside the U.S., that sort of validates me, I guess, and deep down, everyone knows there is a massive speech suppression regime in the U.S. these days, at least at a social level. Sometimes it is a relief for people to be able to casually acknowledge this, even if they’ve been supporters/enablers of it.

    The trick seems to be not giving any indication that one is a “hater” or motivated by such, which, again, is easy for me since it is true – While I find the situation interesting, perhaps in the manner of watching an anthill or something, I actually don’t care enough about any of the contending groups in the U.S., left/right, white/black, jew/gentile, straight/gay, to muster hate or affection for any of them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    The trick seems to be not giving any indication that one is a “hater” or motivated by such, which, again, is easy for me since it is true – While I find the situation interesting, perhaps in the manner of watching an anthill or something, I actually don’t care enough about any of the contending groups in the U.S.
     
    That's not much of a trick since you are not here, in the thick of it.

    Those of us battling the grubby, grabby, and grasping clutches of the left daily can't so easily muster this sprezzatura of someone who decamped to Japan and watches our struggles like an anthill.

  82. 2Mintzin1 [AKA "Mike"] says:

    Mr. Bemused: “Um, no. Soros isn’t a real estate guy, he’s not interested in anything in the US. He makes his money speculating on currencies n stuff like that.”

    Actually, Soros has a great deal on interest in U.S. investments…like any canny rich guy, he has people patrolling investment property all the time…For example , he picked up an interest in a successful Central NY business just last year (Dinosaur Barbecue, in case you are interested).

    Read More
  83. MarkinLA says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    Wall Street got vaporized in 2008. The 2008 crash was, to over simplify, Main Street (unscrupulous mortgage brokers) ripping off Wall Street and Government Sponsored Entities (GSEs) (buyers of debt securities build on worthless mortgages).

    Of course, it's not that simple. Part of Wall Street packaged and sold those debt securities, and there wouldn't have been such a market for them if it weren't for the corrupt GSEs and the government's policies designed to lower lending standards to increase minority home ownership, as Steve has blogged about extensively.

    And, yes: starting in late '08, Wall Street got propped up by the government. But not before Lehman, Bear Stearns and other firms went bust, wiping out a lot of the savings of their executives.

    and there wouldn’t have been such a market for them if it weren’t for the corrupt GSEs and the government’s policies designed to lower lending standards to increase minority home ownership,

    This isn’t true. Just because Sailer says something doesn’t mean it makes sense. The GSEs were late to the sub-prime game. Reports by the Fed showed that only 20% of the sub-prime loans were held by the GSEs. The rest were held by Wall Street or banks that weren’t able to unload them. This is why almost all the brokerages and many banks had to be saved such as Bears Sterns, Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, Citicorp, and Bank of America.

    The GSE were only authorized to buy conforming loans until very late. Those loans had to be well documented and below a certain amount. That is why you had conforming and jumbo loans where jumbo loans carried a higher interest rate because the GSEs could not buy them and the banks had to either sell them to a private party or hold them to maturity.

    The reason why Wall Street thought they could buy them is because they thought they were so smart that using math they could turn any income stream into a series of bonds with different ratings. The GSEs did not make CDOs out of the mortgages they bought they made much simpler mortgage backed securities like they had been doing since their creation.

    You would think that all those “smart” people on Wall Street would know not to buy mortgages with poor documentation. You would think that with decades of statistics on mortgage defaults that “smart” people on Wall Street would know when to stay away from a mortgage. You would think that but with rising real estate prices hiding the risk, stupid mathematics convincing people they were smarter than anybody else, sky-high commissions and bonuses, and knowing you had Congress in your back pocket Wall Street led the economy off the cliff.

    This constant attempt to blame it on the government or the poor slob who took out a bad loan is getting old and tired and lacks any logic. Nobody was forced to make bad loans. They made them because they thought they could sell them before the first payment was due.

    The GSEs cannot force a bank to make a bad loan even if they are willing to buy them. The CRA did not force any bank to make a bad loan. There were plenty of small banks who did not need to be rescued and they did not make bad mortgages. Banks and Thrifts are the only entities subject to the CRA. The companies most likely to have gone bankrupt in 2007-2009 were the mortgage companies like Countrywide lending which had nothing to do with the CRA at all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    "Just because Sailer says something doesn’t mean it makes sense."

    Try reading what I've actually written on the topic.

    , @rod1963
    "This constant attempt to blame it on the government or the poor slob who took out a bad loan is getting old and tired and lacks any logic. Nobody was forced to make bad loans. They made them because they thought they could sell them before the first payment was due. "

    The so-called poor guys who took out the loans and openly lied on their apps about their income, job and assets assets necessary to keep the home they just purchased deserve the shit stick as much as Wall Street. And most of them rightly lost that house they fraudulently purchased and were put back into low income apartments where they belong.
  84. @MarkinLA
    and there wouldn’t have been such a market for them if it weren’t for the corrupt GSEs and the government’s policies designed to lower lending standards to increase minority home ownership,

    This isn't true. Just because Sailer says something doesn't mean it makes sense. The GSEs were late to the sub-prime game. Reports by the Fed showed that only 20% of the sub-prime loans were held by the GSEs. The rest were held by Wall Street or banks that weren't able to unload them. This is why almost all the brokerages and many banks had to be saved such as Bears Sterns, Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, Citicorp, and Bank of America.

    The GSE were only authorized to buy conforming loans until very late. Those loans had to be well documented and below a certain amount. That is why you had conforming and jumbo loans where jumbo loans carried a higher interest rate because the GSEs could not buy them and the banks had to either sell them to a private party or hold them to maturity.

    The reason why Wall Street thought they could buy them is because they thought they were so smart that using math they could turn any income stream into a series of bonds with different ratings. The GSEs did not make CDOs out of the mortgages they bought they made much simpler mortgage backed securities like they had been doing since their creation.

    You would think that all those "smart" people on Wall Street would know not to buy mortgages with poor documentation. You would think that with decades of statistics on mortgage defaults that "smart" people on Wall Street would know when to stay away from a mortgage. You would think that but with rising real estate prices hiding the risk, stupid mathematics convincing people they were smarter than anybody else, sky-high commissions and bonuses, and knowing you had Congress in your back pocket Wall Street led the economy off the cliff.

    This constant attempt to blame it on the government or the poor slob who took out a bad loan is getting old and tired and lacks any logic. Nobody was forced to make bad loans. They made them because they thought they could sell them before the first payment was due.

    The GSEs cannot force a bank to make a bad loan even if they are willing to buy them. The CRA did not force any bank to make a bad loan. There were plenty of small banks who did not need to be rescued and they did not make bad mortgages. Banks and Thrifts are the only entities subject to the CRA. The companies most likely to have gone bankrupt in 2007-2009 were the mortgage companies like Countrywide lending which had nothing to do with the CRA at all.

    “Just because Sailer says something doesn’t mean it makes sense.”

    Try reading what I’ve actually written on the topic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    I have read it before a number of years ago when you first put it out on Alt-right I believe. You were pushing the idea that the CRA was forcing all these banks to make bad loans or that somehow the fault was with banks making loans they knew were bad to minorities. None of it made sense then and it doesn't make sense now.

    Wall Street was under no obligation to buy any mortgages. That they were stuck with so many bad ones after decades of information about what was a good credit risk shows they bought them with their eyes wide open.

    If the CRA had anything to do with it why didn't the residential real estate market blow up under Reagan when the S&L crisis hit. That wasn't due to poorly documented residential real estate loans. It was due to lax lending standards on commercial real estate. Since nobody was guarding the henhouse the bad lending should have expanded into every corner of the banks portfolio. However, the GSEs didn't buy bad loans, just like they didn't buy them until late in the current mortgage crisis well after Wall Street was buying them.

    As for the lending to poor credit risks in minority neighborhoods, the bank has every right to check your entire financial situation out before they give you a loan. That they chose to ignore decades of data on what is a good credit risk and blame it on government is again ridiculous. The CRA was all about banks and thrifts not giving the same service in minority neighborhoods to other neighborhoods. In those long ago days a thrift might have an office in Compton to take deposits but there would be no loan officer. To get a loan you would have to go to another office and they would probably deny your loan anyway.

    You would only be in trouble with the CRA if you didn't lend to a minority with the same credit rating and income as a white person with those same credentials.

    Everybody did this because they wanted to and they were making a ton of money doing it Pretending it would not have happened if not for the evil government is ridiculous.
  85. 2Mintzin1 [AKA "Mike"] says:

    I believe that the readership have galloped off in the wrong direction (OK, It was not the direction I was interested in…so call me a pisher) .
    What is the proof that Soros was actually behind the Ferguson riots?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    What is the proof that Soros was actually behind the Ferguson riots?
     
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/14/george-soros-funds-ferguson-protests-hopes-to-spur/

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/sorosferguson.asp

    TRUE: A grantmaking network founded by George Soros provided funding to some groups that engaged in Ferguson-related protest activities.

    FALSE: George Soros gave money to various groups for the express purpose of promoting Ferguson-related protests and riots.
     
    The Open Society's denial comes down to "Sure, we gave money to these groups that wrecked Ferguson, but we swear, we never told them to do it directly."
  86. rod1963 says:
    @Bill

    They’ve tried StopRush, but that failed. They’ve been going after O’Reilly but are losing.
     
    What problem does Soros have with Oxycodone Man and Captain Chivalry? They seem like fairly tame neocons to me.

    When Beck (or Lou Dobbs) were at their height of anti-establishmentarianism, they were tapping into quite threatening subterranean seams. Beck was calling Soros a puppet master and doing TV shows on the Cultural Marxists. Not just uttering the phrase Cultural Marxist but talking about who they were and what they were about.

    Yep, Dobbs and Beck really pissed a lot of folks off who prefer to keep to the shadows and paid for it with their careers.

    But lets not forget Napolitano. He had his own shown and was a frequent guest of Beck. Fox shit canned him when stepped on some Neo-Con toes IMS. I don’t know what sort of contract Fox has on him, but he could easily have his own radio and TV show but doesn’t. Odd.

    Beck went away after doing pieces as you say on Cultural Marxism and Soros. Dobbs dug too deep into H1-B, open borders, the NAU, Bush’s railroading of the Border Patrol and his attempted amnesty and in general making the establishment look like the anti-American creeps they are and when Obama was elected, that was it for for him.

    And as you say they tapped into some serious anti-establishment sentiment out there that the elites prefer to keep suppressed and misinformed.

    Beck though is screwing up trying to go mainstream. No matter what he does he’ll never be accepted because of his transgressions. Dobbs did a 180 on many issues after being fired in the hopes of being picked up. He eventually was picked by Fox but muzzled.

    As for Ted Baxter and Rush, they are establishment mouthpieces and are rewarded for that. Their job is to keep people distracted and amused.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chang
    Beck still does stuff on Soros and Cultural Marxism. Saw a clip just today.

    It's just that now he does it on BlazeTV which has a tiny fraction of the audience as his old FoxNews show. So nobody notices him anymore. Beck used to get 2-3M viewers at 5 pm on FoxNews.

    How many watch him now on Blaze? Maybe a few hundred thousand? I doubt it that high. How many subscribers does Blaze even have?

    Beck is still a cash cow on radio. #3 talk radio guy after Rush and Hannity. And Blaze is a hugely popular website. But Beck's cultural influence fell off a cliff when he got pushed out at FoxNews.

    FoxNews is the sun that the Right media revolves around. It's a cash juggernaut. O'Reilly makes $20M+ a year. Everybody associated with Fox is getting rich. Saw Krauthammer just sold his millionth copy of his latest book. Almost everybody on the Right is desperate to curry favor with Fox, desperate to get a gig. It's life-changing.

    Mickey Kaus quit DailyCaller today cause Tucker Carlson laid down the law - no Fox-bashing at DailyCaller. Cause that is where the money is made, not this penty-ante web crap.

  87. rod1963 says:
    @MarkinLA
    and there wouldn’t have been such a market for them if it weren’t for the corrupt GSEs and the government’s policies designed to lower lending standards to increase minority home ownership,

    This isn't true. Just because Sailer says something doesn't mean it makes sense. The GSEs were late to the sub-prime game. Reports by the Fed showed that only 20% of the sub-prime loans were held by the GSEs. The rest were held by Wall Street or banks that weren't able to unload them. This is why almost all the brokerages and many banks had to be saved such as Bears Sterns, Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, Citicorp, and Bank of America.

    The GSE were only authorized to buy conforming loans until very late. Those loans had to be well documented and below a certain amount. That is why you had conforming and jumbo loans where jumbo loans carried a higher interest rate because the GSEs could not buy them and the banks had to either sell them to a private party or hold them to maturity.

    The reason why Wall Street thought they could buy them is because they thought they were so smart that using math they could turn any income stream into a series of bonds with different ratings. The GSEs did not make CDOs out of the mortgages they bought they made much simpler mortgage backed securities like they had been doing since their creation.

    You would think that all those "smart" people on Wall Street would know not to buy mortgages with poor documentation. You would think that with decades of statistics on mortgage defaults that "smart" people on Wall Street would know when to stay away from a mortgage. You would think that but with rising real estate prices hiding the risk, stupid mathematics convincing people they were smarter than anybody else, sky-high commissions and bonuses, and knowing you had Congress in your back pocket Wall Street led the economy off the cliff.

    This constant attempt to blame it on the government or the poor slob who took out a bad loan is getting old and tired and lacks any logic. Nobody was forced to make bad loans. They made them because they thought they could sell them before the first payment was due.

    The GSEs cannot force a bank to make a bad loan even if they are willing to buy them. The CRA did not force any bank to make a bad loan. There were plenty of small banks who did not need to be rescued and they did not make bad mortgages. Banks and Thrifts are the only entities subject to the CRA. The companies most likely to have gone bankrupt in 2007-2009 were the mortgage companies like Countrywide lending which had nothing to do with the CRA at all.

    “This constant attempt to blame it on the government or the poor slob who took out a bad loan is getting old and tired and lacks any logic. Nobody was forced to make bad loans. They made them because they thought they could sell them before the first payment was due. ”

    The so-called poor guys who took out the loans and openly lied on their apps about their income, job and assets assets necessary to keep the home they just purchased deserve the shit stick as much as Wall Street. And most of them rightly lost that house they fraudulently purchased and were put back into low income apartments where they belong.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    The so-called poor guys who took out the loans and openly lied on their apps about their income,

    In most of these cases, I bet the loan officer told them to lie or put the numbers in for them.

    I don't know about you but when I applied for a mortgage, I signed a piece of paper saying I give the bank access to all my financial records, I had to provide tax returns, and income verification, bank statements, and as a kicker my Dad had to cosign for a lousy 65,000 mortgage at the very top of the FHA range in 1982.

    Did I forget to mention that putting in false information is a crime, it said so right there on the application.

    The bank has all the cards. Nobody can force them to make a bad loan.
  88. Twinkie says:
    @2Mintzin1
    I believe that the readership have galloped off in the wrong direction (OK, It was not the direction I was interested in...so call me a pisher) .
    What is the proof that Soros was actually behind the Ferguson riots?

    What is the proof that Soros was actually behind the Ferguson riots?

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/14/george-soros-funds-ferguson-protests-hopes-to-spur/

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/sorosferguson.asp

    TRUE: A grantmaking network founded by George Soros provided funding to some groups that engaged in Ferguson-related protest activities.

    FALSE: George Soros gave money to various groups for the express purpose of promoting Ferguson-related protests and riots.

    The Open Society’s denial comes down to “Sure, we gave money to these groups that wrecked Ferguson, but we swear, we never told them to do it directly.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I wouldn't take too seriously the Washington Times' $33 million figure.

    But, yeah, Ferguson as a sort of anti-white Color Revolution in Flyover America is one way of looking at it.

  89. MarkinLA says:
    @Steve Sailer
    "Just because Sailer says something doesn’t mean it makes sense."

    Try reading what I've actually written on the topic.

    I have read it before a number of years ago when you first put it out on Alt-right I believe. You were pushing the idea that the CRA was forcing all these banks to make bad loans or that somehow the fault was with banks making loans they knew were bad to minorities. None of it made sense then and it doesn’t make sense now.

    Wall Street was under no obligation to buy any mortgages. That they were stuck with so many bad ones after decades of information about what was a good credit risk shows they bought them with their eyes wide open.

    If the CRA had anything to do with it why didn’t the residential real estate market blow up under Reagan when the S&L crisis hit. That wasn’t due to poorly documented residential real estate loans. It was due to lax lending standards on commercial real estate. Since nobody was guarding the henhouse the bad lending should have expanded into every corner of the banks portfolio. However, the GSEs didn’t buy bad loans, just like they didn’t buy them until late in the current mortgage crisis well after Wall Street was buying them.

    As for the lending to poor credit risks in minority neighborhoods, the bank has every right to check your entire financial situation out before they give you a loan. That they chose to ignore decades of data on what is a good credit risk and blame it on government is again ridiculous. The CRA was all about banks and thrifts not giving the same service in minority neighborhoods to other neighborhoods. In those long ago days a thrift might have an office in Compton to take deposits but there would be no loan officer. To get a loan you would have to go to another office and they would probably deny your loan anyway.

    You would only be in trouble with the CRA if you didn’t lend to a minority with the same credit rating and income as a white person with those same credentials.

    Everybody did this because they wanted to and they were making a ton of money doing it Pretending it would not have happened if not for the evil government is ridiculous.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Like I said, it's not hard to use a search engine to look up what I've actually said.
  90. @MarkinLA
    I have read it before a number of years ago when you first put it out on Alt-right I believe. You were pushing the idea that the CRA was forcing all these banks to make bad loans or that somehow the fault was with banks making loans they knew were bad to minorities. None of it made sense then and it doesn't make sense now.

    Wall Street was under no obligation to buy any mortgages. That they were stuck with so many bad ones after decades of information about what was a good credit risk shows they bought them with their eyes wide open.

    If the CRA had anything to do with it why didn't the residential real estate market blow up under Reagan when the S&L crisis hit. That wasn't due to poorly documented residential real estate loans. It was due to lax lending standards on commercial real estate. Since nobody was guarding the henhouse the bad lending should have expanded into every corner of the banks portfolio. However, the GSEs didn't buy bad loans, just like they didn't buy them until late in the current mortgage crisis well after Wall Street was buying them.

    As for the lending to poor credit risks in minority neighborhoods, the bank has every right to check your entire financial situation out before they give you a loan. That they chose to ignore decades of data on what is a good credit risk and blame it on government is again ridiculous. The CRA was all about banks and thrifts not giving the same service in minority neighborhoods to other neighborhoods. In those long ago days a thrift might have an office in Compton to take deposits but there would be no loan officer. To get a loan you would have to go to another office and they would probably deny your loan anyway.

    You would only be in trouble with the CRA if you didn't lend to a minority with the same credit rating and income as a white person with those same credentials.

    Everybody did this because they wanted to and they were making a ton of money doing it Pretending it would not have happened if not for the evil government is ridiculous.

    Like I said, it’s not hard to use a search engine to look up what I’ve actually said.

    Read More
  91. @Twinkie

    What is the proof that Soros was actually behind the Ferguson riots?
     
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/14/george-soros-funds-ferguson-protests-hopes-to-spur/

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/sorosferguson.asp

    TRUE: A grantmaking network founded by George Soros provided funding to some groups that engaged in Ferguson-related protest activities.

    FALSE: George Soros gave money to various groups for the express purpose of promoting Ferguson-related protests and riots.
     
    The Open Society's denial comes down to "Sure, we gave money to these groups that wrecked Ferguson, but we swear, we never told them to do it directly."

    I wouldn’t take too seriously the Washington Times’ $33 million figure.

    But, yeah, Ferguson as a sort of anti-white Color Revolution in Flyover America is one way of looking at it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    I wouldn’t take too seriously the Washington Times’ $33 million figure.
     
    I don't. NGO spending is even more opaque, unaccountable, and unmeasured than even government spending. If the donor likes your organizations, results do not matter. That goes for both the right and the left. Politics is really parasitic.

    But, yeah, Ferguson as a sort of anti-white Color Revolution in Flyover America is one way of looking at it.
     
    Of course, it fizzled as the "anti-white Color Revolution in Flyover America" on the basis of the convenience store robbery alone. I'd say "Hands up, don't shoot" backfired spectacularly (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/03/16/lesson-learned-from-the-shooting-of-michael-brown/).

    What is far more disturbing to me of the Ferguson aftermath is the much more mundane but possibly much more lethal in real terms: in the future police officers, especially white or Asian ones, will be even more reluctant to pull the trigger on black criminals than are already the case (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/5/police-officers-more-hesitant-to-shoot-black-suspe/).

    How many white cops will get hurt seriously or die as a result of the increased hesitation? Who will even know?

  92. MarkinLA says:
    @rod1963
    "This constant attempt to blame it on the government or the poor slob who took out a bad loan is getting old and tired and lacks any logic. Nobody was forced to make bad loans. They made them because they thought they could sell them before the first payment was due. "

    The so-called poor guys who took out the loans and openly lied on their apps about their income, job and assets assets necessary to keep the home they just purchased deserve the shit stick as much as Wall Street. And most of them rightly lost that house they fraudulently purchased and were put back into low income apartments where they belong.

    The so-called poor guys who took out the loans and openly lied on their apps about their income,

    In most of these cases, I bet the loan officer told them to lie or put the numbers in for them.

    I don’t know about you but when I applied for a mortgage, I signed a piece of paper saying I give the bank access to all my financial records, I had to provide tax returns, and income verification, bank statements, and as a kicker my Dad had to cosign for a lousy 65,000 mortgage at the very top of the FHA range in 1982.

    Did I forget to mention that putting in false information is a crime, it said so right there on the application.

    The bank has all the cards. Nobody can force them to make a bad loan.

    Read More
  93. Chang says:
    @rod1963
    Yep, Dobbs and Beck really pissed a lot of folks off who prefer to keep to the shadows and paid for it with their careers.

    But lets not forget Napolitano. He had his own shown and was a frequent guest of Beck. Fox shit canned him when stepped on some Neo-Con toes IMS. I don't know what sort of contract Fox has on him, but he could easily have his own radio and TV show but doesn't. Odd.

    Beck went away after doing pieces as you say on Cultural Marxism and Soros. Dobbs dug too deep into H1-B, open borders, the NAU, Bush's railroading of the Border Patrol and his attempted amnesty and in general making the establishment look like the anti-American creeps they are and when Obama was elected, that was it for for him.

    And as you say they tapped into some serious anti-establishment sentiment out there that the elites prefer to keep suppressed and misinformed.

    Beck though is screwing up trying to go mainstream. No matter what he does he'll never be accepted because of his transgressions. Dobbs did a 180 on many issues after being fired in the hopes of being picked up. He eventually was picked by Fox but muzzled.

    As for Ted Baxter and Rush, they are establishment mouthpieces and are rewarded for that. Their job is to keep people distracted and amused.

    Beck still does stuff on Soros and Cultural Marxism. Saw a clip just today.

    It’s just that now he does it on BlazeTV which has a tiny fraction of the audience as his old FoxNews show. So nobody notices him anymore. Beck used to get 2-3M viewers at 5 pm on FoxNews.

    How many watch him now on Blaze? Maybe a few hundred thousand? I doubt it that high. How many subscribers does Blaze even have?

    Beck is still a cash cow on radio. #3 talk radio guy after Rush and Hannity. And Blaze is a hugely popular website. But Beck’s cultural influence fell off a cliff when he got pushed out at FoxNews.

    FoxNews is the sun that the Right media revolves around. It’s a cash juggernaut. O’Reilly makes $20M+ a year. Everybody associated with Fox is getting rich. Saw Krauthammer just sold his millionth copy of his latest book. Almost everybody on the Right is desperate to curry favor with Fox, desperate to get a gig. It’s life-changing.

    Mickey Kaus quit DailyCaller today cause Tucker Carlson laid down the law – no Fox-bashing at DailyCaller. Cause that is where the money is made, not this penty-ante web crap.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    Wow! You're right. The email link I have for Kaus's 3/16 article titled "Fox makes it easy for amnesty" is gone!
  94. @SFG
    You know, I don't even bother with TV news anymore, and I'd encourage everyone here to do the same. In the half-hour it would take you to watch, you can get the MSM spin, and their debunkers for counterpoint, on the web.

    You know, I don’t even bother with TV news anymore, and I’d encourage everyone here to do the same.

    I make my decisions about what to watch or not watch for reasons of my own. For one thing, I’m interested in what’s being said, whether on Fox News or “All Things Considered,” and don’t take it at face value.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    There is a minority of older Americans who aren't online. They are why TV news commercials still use teasers.
  95. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Harry Baldwin
    You know, I don’t even bother with TV news anymore, and I’d encourage everyone here to do the same.

    I make my decisions about what to watch or not watch for reasons of my own. For one thing, I'm interested in what's being said, whether on Fox News or "All Things Considered," and don't take it at face value.

    There is a minority of older Americans who aren’t online. They are why TV news commercials still use teasers.

    Read More
  96. MarkinLA says:

    Like I said, it’s not hard to use a search engine to look up what I’ve actually said.

    Well the only thing my searches come up with are your claims that “diversity” is somehow to blame because minorities seem to have a gotten more sub-prime loans than what they probably should have since they have a higher default rate than whites or Asians.

    How does any of this effect Wall Street since that is where the real damage was. Wall Street selling CDOs, then Wall Street selling credit default swaps on their CDOs, then Wall Street selling synthetic CDOs from the original CDOs. The basic feedstock for all of this was mortgages that anybody who works on Wall Street would have known by looking at them for 5 minutes wasn’t worth buying.

    Read More
  97. Twinkie says:
    @Ex Submarine Officer

    I think a lot of liberals would be terrified to confront a Crimethinker who is also conversant in high culture.
     
    The times that the discussion has turned towards taboo topics with liberals, as we approach a hot zone, I'll just say something neutrally like, "well, there is a lot of science/facts on that subject that isn't very PC at all" and leave it at that (as opposed to being an advocate,etc). Nearly always, the other person will want to venture into such topics and if you can keep yourself as a dispassionate examiner of facts rather than someone with an agenda looking for supporting evidence, you can sometimes have a reasoned discussion.

    It has worked for me, perhaps at least because I've never gone out looking for people to argue with, rather just incidentally strayed in such topics and truly didn't care whether we discussed them or not. Insouciance goes a long way in a lot of activities.

    Another thing I'll occasionally say is "things you aren't allowed to say or discuss in the U.S. these days", again, very casually as if observing whether it is cloudy or sunny outside. Since I live outside the U.S., that sort of validates me, I guess, and deep down, everyone knows there is a massive speech suppression regime in the U.S. these days, at least at a social level. Sometimes it is a relief for people to be able to casually acknowledge this, even if they've been supporters/enablers of it.

    The trick seems to be not giving any indication that one is a "hater" or motivated by such, which, again, is easy for me since it is true - While I find the situation interesting, perhaps in the manner of watching an anthill or something, I actually don't care enough about any of the contending groups in the U.S., left/right, white/black, jew/gentile, straight/gay, to muster hate or affection for any of them.

    The trick seems to be not giving any indication that one is a “hater” or motivated by such, which, again, is easy for me since it is true – While I find the situation interesting, perhaps in the manner of watching an anthill or something, I actually don’t care enough about any of the contending groups in the U.S.

    That’s not much of a trick since you are not here, in the thick of it.

    Those of us battling the grubby, grabby, and grasping clutches of the left daily can’t so easily muster this sprezzatura of someone who decamped to Japan and watches our struggles like an anthill.

    Read More
  98. @PenskeFile
    Meanwhile - Starbucks' conversation about race off to a rough start

    http://www.statesman.com/news/news/national/starbucks-race-together-campaign-rough-start/nkYcc/

    Bizarre!

    Before this week’s campaign, [Starbucks] CEO Howard Schultz held employee meetings on racial inequality in December after the killings of Michael Brown in Ferguson and Eric Garner in New York.

    I’d love to hear Howard Schulz explain why he believes Michael Brown didn’t get exactly what he had coming to him.

    One of the reasons the left has gone nuts is its belief in tolerance as the highest virtue. As a result, we have a tolerance competition. Proof of one’s ideological superiority can only be demonstrated by tolerating those whom backward Americans still refuse to tolerate. Accepting black people is not enough. An incorrigibly racist America elected a black president, didn’t it, so what does it prove? Only that embracing Obama is too easy. We must tolerate the intolerable! Not just the average black person, but black thugs too! Embrace Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown, and point and sputter at anyone so racist that they would dare criticize them.

    Read More
  99. Twinkie says:
    @Steve Sailer
    I wouldn't take too seriously the Washington Times' $33 million figure.

    But, yeah, Ferguson as a sort of anti-white Color Revolution in Flyover America is one way of looking at it.

    I wouldn’t take too seriously the Washington Times’ $33 million figure.

    I don’t. NGO spending is even more opaque, unaccountable, and unmeasured than even government spending. If the donor likes your organizations, results do not matter. That goes for both the right and the left. Politics is really parasitic.

    But, yeah, Ferguson as a sort of anti-white Color Revolution in Flyover America is one way of looking at it.

    Of course, it fizzled as the “anti-white Color Revolution in Flyover America” on the basis of the convenience store robbery alone. I’d say “Hands up, don’t shoot” backfired spectacularly (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/03/16/lesson-learned-from-the-shooting-of-michael-brown/).

    What is far more disturbing to me of the Ferguson aftermath is the much more mundane but possibly much more lethal in real terms: in the future police officers, especially white or Asian ones, will be even more reluctant to pull the trigger on black criminals than are already the case (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/5/police-officers-more-hesitant-to-shoot-black-suspe/).

    How many white cops will get hurt seriously or die as a result of the increased hesitation? Who will even know?

    Read More
    • Replies: @matt
    How many white cops will get hurt seriously or die as a result of the increased hesitation?

    Being a cop might become as dangerous as being a taxi driver or roofer, or maybe even an electrician! I dread even thinking about it...
  100. @Twinkie

    But the whole trucks-guns-and-football thing mystifies me.
     
    I went to high school in NYC (the old Stuyvesant HS), but now loathe big cities. Here is my answer about "guns, trucks, and football."

    Guns you know already (or you think you know - it's partly the practical stuff, but it's also more atavistic than that - weapons mean power and freedom).

    Trucks. Easy. Very practical for dealing with occasionally bad weather/roads. Excellent for hauling all kinds of stuff from the said guns above to dead animals, kids' bikes, etc. Small electric/hybrid cars are not conducive to a rural/exurban life with lots of kids, outdoor activities, hunting, etc.

    Football. I am not a big fan of football (I only care about combat sports), but I respect it and participate in its celebration, because in many small towns football along with church service/mass is a communal event. In many small towns and even many suburban areas, practically the whole town shows up for the local high school games. It builds social cohesion and reinforces the town identity.

    Why on earth do we waste so much energy as a nation on sports when it’s science and math that will let us compete with the Chinese?
     
    Looks like Chinese kids can use some sports: http://www.seattletimes.com/news/too-soft-recruits-hindering-chinas-army/

    the right hates thinking
     
    The grassroots of the right tend not to over-intellectualize things. If you were a Burkean as I am, you would know that conservatism is not an ideology but an instinct. Call it the simple, practical, timeless wisdom of the yeomanry, the bedrock of any English-founded society.

    The right has its own intellectual class, to be sure, but tends not to revere it as the left does its own. I think that is rather healthy.

    as a teenager I always had some idea of fine suits, marble busts of Great Men, and forgotten great literature, not tailgate parties, guzzling beer, and stock car racing. Maybe I was a Brit in a past life?
     
    Look, I have Savile Row and Neapolitan bespoke suits. But the whole idea of conservatism as English bespoke tailoring and marble busts is an affectation, not real conservatism of real community. Besides, drinking beers and appreciating stock car racing is in no way incompatible with being well-read.

    One of the interesting things I find about people who veer from HBD to (white) ethno-nationalism is that, invariably, they are people who lack real, organic community in their lives. So they try to construct one artificially (usually over the Net) based on an ideology of ethno-purism and separatism. People (especially whites) who come from robust, intact communities of families, churches, town football games, and hunting/drinking buddies are not easily swayed by such racial fundamentalism, because they do not need the latter to feel a part of something larger than their individual selves.

    Awesome comment, twinkie.

    “The grassroots of the right tend not to over-intellectualize things. If you were a Burkean as I am, you would know that conservatism is not an ideology but an instinct. Call it the simple, practical, timeless wisdom of the yeomanry, the bedrock of any English-founded society.”

    In other words, hobbits. If you’re hating on hobbits, it’s time to take stock of your worldview.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    For all the "Hurr PROLES" that the alt-right gives to flyover America, the luminaries of altright are always clamoring for someone else to charge the ramparts while they dispassionately lead from an ivory tower or some shit.

    Some idiot here couldn't see the value of a truck, wtf. Because someone likes guns and doesn't need to write 100000 word essays on random dead philosophers doesn't mean they're not part of the Conservative Kids Club. Conservatism isn't jerking off to fine suits and marbel busts like some sort of American Psycho LARP. An instinct is probably the best way Ive heard it put versus yet another Asperger spectrum obsession of internet dweebs.
  101. You would only be in trouble with the CRA if you didn’t lend to a minority with the same credit rating and income as a white person with those same credentials.

    Not so. Obama took a case under the CRA so that a black person’s worse credit history could not be used against them when seeking a loan.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    The purpose of the CRA wasn't about individual cases. It was about banks and thrifts not providing the same services in minority neighborhoods than they did in white neighborhoods. When it was first introduced it was common for S&Ls to have an office in a poor neighborhood without a loan officer. It probably had more to do with not wanting to pay somebody to sit around all day and do nothing but the claim was made that these people were shut out of the ability to get a loan and would have to go elsewhere where it cost more if they could get one at all.
  102. IA says:
    @Lost in Time
    Is there a way to speculate in real estate that would make a years-long spiral of racial tensions and violence profitable for unscrupulous investors?

    And are there forensic economists who can detect such crimes? What do they look for?

    “And are there forensic economists who can detect such crimes? What do they look for?”

    Yes. We look for politicians and bureaucrats who benefit from a flood of federal money. Community organizers and “charities” who “reach out” to various donors who “care” also exploit years of racial tension. After all, its imperative to help rehabilitate the people who are victims of racism.

    When, say, a half-way house is built in a decaying neighborhood the developer is allowed to “gift” a sizable donation to one of the many peoples’ charities – who just happens to be headed by a close relative of the new mayor.

    High priests of progressivism do well too. They ritually whip the laggards who aren’t sufficiently enthusiastic.

    Eventually, it’s decided that no-down payment loans will be given to those who don’t pay their bills in order to close the “housing gap.” So, loan originators profit, and top management at Fannie and Freddie do well too. Ask your current mayor.

    So, to detect who profits from years of racial tension, a recap: politicians, government employees, community organizers, non-profits, relatives of the mayor, and most important – victims of racism.

    As for the flyover shlubs who bought before the invasion, they get a kick in the backside.

    Read More
  103. @syonredux
    Great comment from Marine Le Pen in Goldberg's article:

    “The reality is that there exist in France associations that are supposedly representative of French Jews, which have stuck with a software that came out of the Second World War,” she said, meaning that members of the Jewish leadership are still preoccupied with the threat of Nazi-like fascism. “For decades they have continued to fight against an anti-Semitism that no longer exists in France, for reasons of—how should I say this?—intellectual laziness. And by a form of submission to the politically correct. And while they were doing this, while they were fighting against an enemy that no longer existed, an anti-Semitism was gaining force in France stemming notably from the development of fundamentalist Islamist thought.”
     
    http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/03/is-it-time-for-the-jews-to-leave-europe/386279/

    “The reality is that there exist in France associations that are supposedly representative of French Jews, which have stuck with a software that came out of the Second World War,” she said, meaning that members of the Jewish leadership are still preoccupied with the threat of Nazi-like fascism.

    Apparently Atlantic readers can’t be relied on to interpret even the most obvious metaphors.

    But software as we know it did not exist during the Second World War!

    Read More
  104. @Desiderius
    Awesome comment, twinkie.

    "The grassroots of the right tend not to over-intellectualize things. If you were a Burkean as I am, you would know that conservatism is not an ideology but an instinct. Call it the simple, practical, timeless wisdom of the yeomanry, the bedrock of any English-founded society."

    In other words, hobbits. If you're hating on hobbits, it's time to take stock of your worldview.

    For all the “Hurr PROLES” that the alt-right gives to flyover America, the luminaries of altright are always clamoring for someone else to charge the ramparts while they dispassionately lead from an ivory tower or some shit.

    Some idiot here couldn’t see the value of a truck, wtf. Because someone likes guns and doesn’t need to write 100000 word essays on random dead philosophers doesn’t mean they’re not part of the Conservative Kids Club. Conservatism isn’t jerking off to fine suits and marbel busts like some sort of American Psycho LARP. An instinct is probably the best way Ive heard it put versus yet another Asperger spectrum obsession of internet dweebs.

    Read More
  105. @Twinkie

    But the whole trucks-guns-and-football thing mystifies me.
     
    I went to high school in NYC (the old Stuyvesant HS), but now loathe big cities. Here is my answer about "guns, trucks, and football."

    Guns you know already (or you think you know - it's partly the practical stuff, but it's also more atavistic than that - weapons mean power and freedom).

    Trucks. Easy. Very practical for dealing with occasionally bad weather/roads. Excellent for hauling all kinds of stuff from the said guns above to dead animals, kids' bikes, etc. Small electric/hybrid cars are not conducive to a rural/exurban life with lots of kids, outdoor activities, hunting, etc.

    Football. I am not a big fan of football (I only care about combat sports), but I respect it and participate in its celebration, because in many small towns football along with church service/mass is a communal event. In many small towns and even many suburban areas, practically the whole town shows up for the local high school games. It builds social cohesion and reinforces the town identity.

    Why on earth do we waste so much energy as a nation on sports when it’s science and math that will let us compete with the Chinese?
     
    Looks like Chinese kids can use some sports: http://www.seattletimes.com/news/too-soft-recruits-hindering-chinas-army/

    the right hates thinking
     
    The grassroots of the right tend not to over-intellectualize things. If you were a Burkean as I am, you would know that conservatism is not an ideology but an instinct. Call it the simple, practical, timeless wisdom of the yeomanry, the bedrock of any English-founded society.

    The right has its own intellectual class, to be sure, but tends not to revere it as the left does its own. I think that is rather healthy.

    as a teenager I always had some idea of fine suits, marble busts of Great Men, and forgotten great literature, not tailgate parties, guzzling beer, and stock car racing. Maybe I was a Brit in a past life?
     
    Look, I have Savile Row and Neapolitan bespoke suits. But the whole idea of conservatism as English bespoke tailoring and marble busts is an affectation, not real conservatism of real community. Besides, drinking beers and appreciating stock car racing is in no way incompatible with being well-read.

    One of the interesting things I find about people who veer from HBD to (white) ethno-nationalism is that, invariably, they are people who lack real, organic community in their lives. So they try to construct one artificially (usually over the Net) based on an ideology of ethno-purism and separatism. People (especially whites) who come from robust, intact communities of families, churches, town football games, and hunting/drinking buddies are not easily swayed by such racial fundamentalism, because they do not need the latter to feel a part of something larger than their individual selves.

    +1. Well said. Small town America still has a sense of community, and high school sports are a big part of it.

    Read More
  106. @Chang
    Beck still does stuff on Soros and Cultural Marxism. Saw a clip just today.

    It's just that now he does it on BlazeTV which has a tiny fraction of the audience as his old FoxNews show. So nobody notices him anymore. Beck used to get 2-3M viewers at 5 pm on FoxNews.

    How many watch him now on Blaze? Maybe a few hundred thousand? I doubt it that high. How many subscribers does Blaze even have?

    Beck is still a cash cow on radio. #3 talk radio guy after Rush and Hannity. And Blaze is a hugely popular website. But Beck's cultural influence fell off a cliff when he got pushed out at FoxNews.

    FoxNews is the sun that the Right media revolves around. It's a cash juggernaut. O'Reilly makes $20M+ a year. Everybody associated with Fox is getting rich. Saw Krauthammer just sold his millionth copy of his latest book. Almost everybody on the Right is desperate to curry favor with Fox, desperate to get a gig. It's life-changing.

    Mickey Kaus quit DailyCaller today cause Tucker Carlson laid down the law - no Fox-bashing at DailyCaller. Cause that is where the money is made, not this penty-ante web crap.

    Wow! You’re right. The email link I have for Kaus’s 3/16 article titled “Fox makes it easy for amnesty” is gone!

    Read More
  107. fnn says:
    @Twinkie

    But the whole trucks-guns-and-football thing mystifies me.
     
    I went to high school in NYC (the old Stuyvesant HS), but now loathe big cities. Here is my answer about "guns, trucks, and football."

    Guns you know already (or you think you know - it's partly the practical stuff, but it's also more atavistic than that - weapons mean power and freedom).

    Trucks. Easy. Very practical for dealing with occasionally bad weather/roads. Excellent for hauling all kinds of stuff from the said guns above to dead animals, kids' bikes, etc. Small electric/hybrid cars are not conducive to a rural/exurban life with lots of kids, outdoor activities, hunting, etc.

    Football. I am not a big fan of football (I only care about combat sports), but I respect it and participate in its celebration, because in many small towns football along with church service/mass is a communal event. In many small towns and even many suburban areas, practically the whole town shows up for the local high school games. It builds social cohesion and reinforces the town identity.

    Why on earth do we waste so much energy as a nation on sports when it’s science and math that will let us compete with the Chinese?
     
    Looks like Chinese kids can use some sports: http://www.seattletimes.com/news/too-soft-recruits-hindering-chinas-army/

    the right hates thinking
     
    The grassroots of the right tend not to over-intellectualize things. If you were a Burkean as I am, you would know that conservatism is not an ideology but an instinct. Call it the simple, practical, timeless wisdom of the yeomanry, the bedrock of any English-founded society.

    The right has its own intellectual class, to be sure, but tends not to revere it as the left does its own. I think that is rather healthy.

    as a teenager I always had some idea of fine suits, marble busts of Great Men, and forgotten great literature, not tailgate parties, guzzling beer, and stock car racing. Maybe I was a Brit in a past life?
     
    Look, I have Savile Row and Neapolitan bespoke suits. But the whole idea of conservatism as English bespoke tailoring and marble busts is an affectation, not real conservatism of real community. Besides, drinking beers and appreciating stock car racing is in no way incompatible with being well-read.

    One of the interesting things I find about people who veer from HBD to (white) ethno-nationalism is that, invariably, they are people who lack real, organic community in their lives. So they try to construct one artificially (usually over the Net) based on an ideology of ethno-purism and separatism. People (especially whites) who come from robust, intact communities of families, churches, town football games, and hunting/drinking buddies are not easily swayed by such racial fundamentalism, because they do not need the latter to feel a part of something larger than their individual selves.

    “One of the interesting things I find about people who veer from HBD to (white) ethno-nationalism is that, invariably, they are people who lack real, organic community in their lives. ”

    I think it was Robert Stark (in one of his podcasts) who said that WNs come disproportionately from California.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    I think it was Robert Stark (in one of his podcasts) who said that WNs come disproportionately from California.
     
    I don't know whether that is true, but it sounds plausible.
  108. MarkinLA says:
    @Diane Rodham
    You would only be in trouble with the CRA if you didn’t lend to a minority with the same credit rating and income as a white person with those same credentials.

    Not so. Obama took a case under the CRA so that a black person's worse credit history could not be used against them when seeking a loan.

    The purpose of the CRA wasn’t about individual cases. It was about banks and thrifts not providing the same services in minority neighborhoods than they did in white neighborhoods. When it was first introduced it was common for S&Ls to have an office in a poor neighborhood without a loan officer. It probably had more to do with not wanting to pay somebody to sit around all day and do nothing but the claim was made that these people were shut out of the ability to get a loan and would have to go elsewhere where it cost more if they could get one at all.

    Read More
  109. The hobbits were protected by friends around them. Nowadays the “hobbits” have no friends.

    Read More
  110. matt says:
    @Twinkie

    I wouldn’t take too seriously the Washington Times’ $33 million figure.
     
    I don't. NGO spending is even more opaque, unaccountable, and unmeasured than even government spending. If the donor likes your organizations, results do not matter. That goes for both the right and the left. Politics is really parasitic.

    But, yeah, Ferguson as a sort of anti-white Color Revolution in Flyover America is one way of looking at it.
     
    Of course, it fizzled as the "anti-white Color Revolution in Flyover America" on the basis of the convenience store robbery alone. I'd say "Hands up, don't shoot" backfired spectacularly (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/03/16/lesson-learned-from-the-shooting-of-michael-brown/).

    What is far more disturbing to me of the Ferguson aftermath is the much more mundane but possibly much more lethal in real terms: in the future police officers, especially white or Asian ones, will be even more reluctant to pull the trigger on black criminals than are already the case (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/5/police-officers-more-hesitant-to-shoot-black-suspe/).

    How many white cops will get hurt seriously or die as a result of the increased hesitation? Who will even know?

    How many white cops will get hurt seriously or die as a result of the increased hesitation?

    Being a cop might become as dangerous as being a taxi driver or roofer, or maybe even an electrician! I dread even thinking about it…

    Read More
  111. matt says:
    @Twinkie

    But the whole trucks-guns-and-football thing mystifies me.
     
    I went to high school in NYC (the old Stuyvesant HS), but now loathe big cities. Here is my answer about "guns, trucks, and football."

    Guns you know already (or you think you know - it's partly the practical stuff, but it's also more atavistic than that - weapons mean power and freedom).

    Trucks. Easy. Very practical for dealing with occasionally bad weather/roads. Excellent for hauling all kinds of stuff from the said guns above to dead animals, kids' bikes, etc. Small electric/hybrid cars are not conducive to a rural/exurban life with lots of kids, outdoor activities, hunting, etc.

    Football. I am not a big fan of football (I only care about combat sports), but I respect it and participate in its celebration, because in many small towns football along with church service/mass is a communal event. In many small towns and even many suburban areas, practically the whole town shows up for the local high school games. It builds social cohesion and reinforces the town identity.

    Why on earth do we waste so much energy as a nation on sports when it’s science and math that will let us compete with the Chinese?
     
    Looks like Chinese kids can use some sports: http://www.seattletimes.com/news/too-soft-recruits-hindering-chinas-army/

    the right hates thinking
     
    The grassroots of the right tend not to over-intellectualize things. If you were a Burkean as I am, you would know that conservatism is not an ideology but an instinct. Call it the simple, practical, timeless wisdom of the yeomanry, the bedrock of any English-founded society.

    The right has its own intellectual class, to be sure, but tends not to revere it as the left does its own. I think that is rather healthy.

    as a teenager I always had some idea of fine suits, marble busts of Great Men, and forgotten great literature, not tailgate parties, guzzling beer, and stock car racing. Maybe I was a Brit in a past life?
     
    Look, I have Savile Row and Neapolitan bespoke suits. But the whole idea of conservatism as English bespoke tailoring and marble busts is an affectation, not real conservatism of real community. Besides, drinking beers and appreciating stock car racing is in no way incompatible with being well-read.

    One of the interesting things I find about people who veer from HBD to (white) ethno-nationalism is that, invariably, they are people who lack real, organic community in their lives. So they try to construct one artificially (usually over the Net) based on an ideology of ethno-purism and separatism. People (especially whites) who come from robust, intact communities of families, churches, town football games, and hunting/drinking buddies are not easily swayed by such racial fundamentalism, because they do not need the latter to feel a part of something larger than their individual selves.

    If you were a Burkean as I am, you would know that conservatism is not an ideology but an instinct

    What silly, conceited blather. Burke was highly ideological. Conservatives have always been ideological.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    What silly, conceited blather. Burke was highly ideological. Conservatives have always been ideological.
     
    You and I obviously have very different understanding of what conservatism is.

    Read the man himself: http://www.amazon.com/Reflections-Revolution-France-Oxford-Classics/dp/0199539022/

    Here is a Cliff Notes version: http://vox-nova.com/2008/06/18/edmund-burkes-anti-ideology/

    Here is my even shorter summary: Real conservatism is anti-ideology.
  112. Twinkie says:
    @fnn
    "One of the interesting things I find about people who veer from HBD to (white) ethno-nationalism is that, invariably, they are people who lack real, organic community in their lives. "

    I think it was Robert Stark (in one of his podcasts) who said that WNs come disproportionately from California.

    I think it was Robert Stark (in one of his podcasts) who said that WNs come disproportionately from California.

    I don’t know whether that is true, but it sounds plausible.

    Read More
  113. Twinkie says:
    @matt
    If you were a Burkean as I am, you would know that conservatism is not an ideology but an instinct

    What silly, conceited blather. Burke was highly ideological. Conservatives have always been ideological.

    What silly, conceited blather. Burke was highly ideological. Conservatives have always been ideological.

    You and I obviously have very different understanding of what conservatism is.

    Read the man himself: http://www.amazon.com/Reflections-Revolution-France-Oxford-Classics/dp/0199539022/

    Here is a Cliff Notes version: http://vox-nova.com/2008/06/18/edmund-burkes-anti-ideology/

    Here is my even shorter summary: Real conservatism is anti-ideology.

    Read More
    • Replies: @matt
    Burke had a highly developed theory about why hierarchy was a good thing, and why common people should be ruled by their betters. He spent a lot of time thinking about it. It would have sounded extremely foreign to egalitarian but highly non-ideological Paleolithic foragers.

    Look, it's not your fault. You picked up the same false interpretation of Burke that everyone else has, across the political spectrum. But you need to read the Corey Robin book I linked to above to disabuse yourself of this idiocy.
  114. matt says:
    @Twinkie

    What silly, conceited blather. Burke was highly ideological. Conservatives have always been ideological.
     
    You and I obviously have very different understanding of what conservatism is.

    Read the man himself: http://www.amazon.com/Reflections-Revolution-France-Oxford-Classics/dp/0199539022/

    Here is a Cliff Notes version: http://vox-nova.com/2008/06/18/edmund-burkes-anti-ideology/

    Here is my even shorter summary: Real conservatism is anti-ideology.

    Burke had a highly developed theory about why hierarchy was a good thing, and why common people should be ruled by their betters. He spent a lot of time thinking about it. It would have sounded extremely foreign to egalitarian but highly non-ideological Paleolithic foragers.

    Look, it’s not your fault. You picked up the same false interpretation of Burke that everyone else has, across the political spectrum. But you need to read the Corey Robin book I linked to above to disabuse yourself of this idiocy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    It would have sounded extremely foreign to egalitarian but highly non-ideological Paleolithic foragers.
     
    Being egalitarian and non-ideological are not the same things.

    You picked up the same false interpretation of Burke that everyone else has, across the political spectrum. But you need to read the Corey Robin book I linked to above to disabuse yourself of this idiocy.
     
    "Everyone else" has this interpretation because that's what Burke himself advocated.

    I tend to trust Burke himself (read his magnum opus, "Reflections on the Revolution in France," which is one of my favorite books) and Russell Kirk on what Burkean conservatism means over someone who desperately wants to imitate Kirk.

    But don't let that stop you from being ignorantly arrogant and condescending ("What silly, conceited blather" and "it's not your fault").
  115. Art Deco says: • Website
    @anon

    Unless ‘everyone’ had all their money in collateralized debt obligations, no.
     
    The banks lost trillions due to securitization (making them all technically bankrupt).

    The bailouts, ZIRP and QE then stole (and are still stealing) trillions from the public to make the banks solvent again.

    So effectively - because the banks had trillions in collateralized debt obligation and the banks own the government - yes.

    The banks lost trillions due to securitization (making them all technically bankrupt).

    No, they were not. Three bulge bracket securities firms were insolvent (Bear Stearns, Lehman, and Merrill Lynch), one universal bank (Citigroup), one large commercial bank (Wachovia), one large savings bank (Washington Mutual), one large finance company (Countrywide), one insurance company (AIG), and the two government sponsored mortgage maws. There were a mess of smaller firms which were distressed, but these could have been dealt with by the FDIC and the bankruptcy courts with no extraordinary intervention. Bank of America fell into distress because they absorbed the losses of Countrywide and Merrill, Lynch and Goldman and Morgan Stanley were under siege because of general panic. The foregoing (other than AIG and the mortgage maws) received bridge loans which they paid back. For some firms (JP Morgan, Goldman), the cash was shoved down their throat by Paulson.

    Read More
  116. Twinkie says:
    @matt
    Burke had a highly developed theory about why hierarchy was a good thing, and why common people should be ruled by their betters. He spent a lot of time thinking about it. It would have sounded extremely foreign to egalitarian but highly non-ideological Paleolithic foragers.

    Look, it's not your fault. You picked up the same false interpretation of Burke that everyone else has, across the political spectrum. But you need to read the Corey Robin book I linked to above to disabuse yourself of this idiocy.

    It would have sounded extremely foreign to egalitarian but highly non-ideological Paleolithic foragers.

    Being egalitarian and non-ideological are not the same things.

    You picked up the same false interpretation of Burke that everyone else has, across the political spectrum. But you need to read the Corey Robin book I linked to above to disabuse yourself of this idiocy.

    “Everyone else” has this interpretation because that’s what Burke himself advocated.

    I tend to trust Burke himself (read his magnum opus, “Reflections on the Revolution in France,” which is one of my favorite books) and Russell Kirk on what Burkean conservatism means over someone who desperately wants to imitate Kirk.

    But don’t let that stop you from being ignorantly arrogant and condescending (“What silly, conceited blather” and “it’s not your fault”).

    Read More
    • Replies: @matt

    Being egalitarian and non-ideological are not the same things.
     
    No doubt. My point was that being egalitarian and being ideological aren't the same things either. Egalitarianism is more or less the default setting of humanity, as Boehm and our own Razib Khan argue.

    read his magnum opus, “Reflections on the Revolution in France,”
     
    That's not really his magnum opus. A more important work of his was probably A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and the Beautiful, which gives a lot of insight into Burke's ideology. After that, you can read Letters on a Regicide Peace, in which he lays out his ideology of counterrevolutionary internationalism (so much for the "little platoons" phrase that Kirk loved to overemphasize), and for good measure, his Speech on the Reform of the Representation of the House of Commons in Parliament, where he argues with fanatical urgency against mild democratic reforms of the sort that were later introduced in 1832.

    You are taking Burke's attacks on the "metaphysical" views of the French Revolutionaries to imply that Burke had no "metaphysics" of his own. That's rather like taking Aristotle's criticism of Plato's theory of Forms as a rejection of all philosophy.

    But don’t let that stop you from being ignorantly arrogant and condescending

    Not ignorantly. I have the right to be condescending when I am correct, as I have so far always been when arguing with you (and Svigor, and especially Art Deco).

  117. matt says:
    @Twinkie

    It would have sounded extremely foreign to egalitarian but highly non-ideological Paleolithic foragers.
     
    Being egalitarian and non-ideological are not the same things.

    You picked up the same false interpretation of Burke that everyone else has, across the political spectrum. But you need to read the Corey Robin book I linked to above to disabuse yourself of this idiocy.
     
    "Everyone else" has this interpretation because that's what Burke himself advocated.

    I tend to trust Burke himself (read his magnum opus, "Reflections on the Revolution in France," which is one of my favorite books) and Russell Kirk on what Burkean conservatism means over someone who desperately wants to imitate Kirk.

    But don't let that stop you from being ignorantly arrogant and condescending ("What silly, conceited blather" and "it's not your fault").

    Being egalitarian and non-ideological are not the same things.

    No doubt. My point was that being egalitarian and being ideological aren’t the same things either. Egalitarianism is more or less the default setting of humanity, as Boehm and our own Razib Khan argue.

    read his magnum opus, “Reflections on the Revolution in France,”

    That’s not really his magnum opus. A more important work of his was probably A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and the Beautiful, which gives a lot of insight into Burke’s ideology. After that, you can read Letters on a Regicide Peace, in which he lays out his ideology of counterrevolutionary internationalism (so much for the “little platoons” phrase that Kirk loved to overemphasize), and for good measure, his Speech on the Reform of the Representation of the House of Commons in Parliament, where he argues with fanatical urgency against mild democratic reforms of the sort that were later introduced in 1832.

    You are taking Burke’s attacks on the “metaphysical” views of the French Revolutionaries to imply that Burke had no “metaphysics” of his own. That’s rather like taking Aristotle’s criticism of Plato’s theory of Forms as a rejection of all philosophy.

    But don’t let that stop you from being ignorantly arrogant and condescending

    Not ignorantly. I have the right to be condescending when I am correct, as I have so far always been when arguing with you (and Svigor, and especially Art Deco).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Egalitarianism is more or less the default setting of humanity, as Boehm and our own Razib Khan argue.
     
    Prior to the agricultural lifestyle, maybe. Perhaps you are unaware that human evolution accelerated with the beginning of agriculture, and we are not genetically the same as those who came before us 10,000 years ago.

    We haven't lived as small, nomadic bands with no one around for thousands of square miles in some years. As such the selection pressure has been rather different.

    That’s not really his magnum opus.
     
    Says you. Of course *you* are most drawn to the more abstract (and mostly earlier) of his writings. Young know-it-all's tend to argue about philosophy. Old men tend to discuss practical wisdom.

    You are taking Burke’s attacks on the “metaphysical” views of the French Revolutionaries to imply that Burke had no “metaphysics” of his own.
     
    On the contrary, that is not my view. Rather my view (as was Burke's and Kirk's view of the same) is that the "metaphysics" of the Revolution was an unnatural, constructed one, an ideology willed into being, while those of Burke were a natural evolution and accumulations of his time and place *and* importantly people.

    I have the right to be condescending when I am correct, as I have so far always been when arguing with you (and Svigor, and especially Art Deco).
     
    1. Legend in your own mind. 2. You should take your own critique to heart - "What silly, conceited blather," as you put it.
  118. Twinkie says:
    @matt

    Being egalitarian and non-ideological are not the same things.
     
    No doubt. My point was that being egalitarian and being ideological aren't the same things either. Egalitarianism is more or less the default setting of humanity, as Boehm and our own Razib Khan argue.

    read his magnum opus, “Reflections on the Revolution in France,”
     
    That's not really his magnum opus. A more important work of his was probably A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and the Beautiful, which gives a lot of insight into Burke's ideology. After that, you can read Letters on a Regicide Peace, in which he lays out his ideology of counterrevolutionary internationalism (so much for the "little platoons" phrase that Kirk loved to overemphasize), and for good measure, his Speech on the Reform of the Representation of the House of Commons in Parliament, where he argues with fanatical urgency against mild democratic reforms of the sort that were later introduced in 1832.

    You are taking Burke's attacks on the "metaphysical" views of the French Revolutionaries to imply that Burke had no "metaphysics" of his own. That's rather like taking Aristotle's criticism of Plato's theory of Forms as a rejection of all philosophy.

    But don’t let that stop you from being ignorantly arrogant and condescending

    Not ignorantly. I have the right to be condescending when I am correct, as I have so far always been when arguing with you (and Svigor, and especially Art Deco).

    Egalitarianism is more or less the default setting of humanity, as Boehm and our own Razib Khan argue.

    Prior to the agricultural lifestyle, maybe. Perhaps you are unaware that human evolution accelerated with the beginning of agriculture, and we are not genetically the same as those who came before us 10,000 years ago.

    We haven’t lived as small, nomadic bands with no one around for thousands of square miles in some years. As such the selection pressure has been rather different.

    That’s not really his magnum opus.

    Says you. Of course *you* are most drawn to the more abstract (and mostly earlier) of his writings. Young know-it-all’s tend to argue about philosophy. Old men tend to discuss practical wisdom.

    You are taking Burke’s attacks on the “metaphysical” views of the French Revolutionaries to imply that Burke had no “metaphysics” of his own.

    On the contrary, that is not my view. Rather my view (as was Burke’s and Kirk’s view of the same) is that the “metaphysics” of the Revolution was an unnatural, constructed one, an ideology willed into being, while those of Burke were a natural evolution and accumulations of his time and place *and* importantly people.

    I have the right to be condescending when I am correct, as I have so far always been when arguing with you (and Svigor, and especially Art Deco).

    1. Legend in your own mind. 2. You should take your own critique to heart – “What silly, conceited blather,” as you put it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @matt
    Prior to the agricultural lifestyle, maybe. Perhaps you are unaware that human evolution accelerated with the beginning of agriculture

    With respect to some things, sure. With respect to other things, not so much: we haven't developed any new limbs, internal organs, or major sensory/cognitive functions lately. Is it possible the egalitarian instinct was bred out of (some of) us in the last 10,000 years? Sure. But the resilient popularity of egalitarian political, economic, social, and religious ideas in post-agricultural human history weighs heavily against that hypothesis. What do you think reactionaries are reacting against?

    By the way, Burke also tended to view egalitarian anarchy as the natural state of humanity. Cf., e.g., his satirical Vindication of Natural Society (another one of his dreaded early works). On the other hand, he saw civilized hierarchies as fragile things in need of constant defense and protection.

    the “metaphysics” of the Revolution was an unnatural, constructed one, an ideology willed into being, while those of Burke were a natural evolution and accumulations of his time and place *and* importantly people.

    And Burke felt the need, at that point in time, to make that historically developed metaphysics explicit, and to defend it against the (quite natural, albeit articulated) egalitarian metaphysics of the French Revolution. He wanted to combat ideology with ideology. That's been my point all along.

  119. matt says:
    @Twinkie

    Egalitarianism is more or less the default setting of humanity, as Boehm and our own Razib Khan argue.
     
    Prior to the agricultural lifestyle, maybe. Perhaps you are unaware that human evolution accelerated with the beginning of agriculture, and we are not genetically the same as those who came before us 10,000 years ago.

    We haven't lived as small, nomadic bands with no one around for thousands of square miles in some years. As such the selection pressure has been rather different.

    That’s not really his magnum opus.
     
    Says you. Of course *you* are most drawn to the more abstract (and mostly earlier) of his writings. Young know-it-all's tend to argue about philosophy. Old men tend to discuss practical wisdom.

    You are taking Burke’s attacks on the “metaphysical” views of the French Revolutionaries to imply that Burke had no “metaphysics” of his own.
     
    On the contrary, that is not my view. Rather my view (as was Burke's and Kirk's view of the same) is that the "metaphysics" of the Revolution was an unnatural, constructed one, an ideology willed into being, while those of Burke were a natural evolution and accumulations of his time and place *and* importantly people.

    I have the right to be condescending when I am correct, as I have so far always been when arguing with you (and Svigor, and especially Art Deco).
     
    1. Legend in your own mind. 2. You should take your own critique to heart - "What silly, conceited blather," as you put it.

    Prior to the agricultural lifestyle, maybe. Perhaps you are unaware that human evolution accelerated with the beginning of agriculture

    With respect to some things, sure. With respect to other things, not so much: we haven’t developed any new limbs, internal organs, or major sensory/cognitive functions lately. Is it possible the egalitarian instinct was bred out of (some of) us in the last 10,000 years? Sure. But the resilient popularity of egalitarian political, economic, social, and religious ideas in post-agricultural human history weighs heavily against that hypothesis. What do you think reactionaries are reacting against?

    By the way, Burke also tended to view egalitarian anarchy as the natural state of humanity. Cf., e.g., his satirical Vindication of Natural Society (another one of his dreaded early works). On the other hand, he saw civilized hierarchies as fragile things in need of constant defense and protection.

    the “metaphysics” of the Revolution was an unnatural, constructed one, an ideology willed into being, while those of Burke were a natural evolution and accumulations of his time and place *and* importantly people.

    And Burke felt the need, at that point in time, to make that historically developed metaphysics explicit, and to defend it against the (quite natural, albeit articulated) egalitarian metaphysics of the French Revolution. He wanted to combat ideology with ideology. That’s been my point all along.

    Read More
  120. […] none of these magazines seem the type to court badthink. Linking to me runs a risk of drawing the Eye of Soros. It doesn’t look like the author or any editors actually reviewed my site or the link beyond […]

    Read More

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation
Confederate Flag Day, State Capitol, Raleigh, N.C. -- March 3, 2007
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored