I saw the Vioxx study when it first came out and I was laughing. I have lost my link to the study but here is what I remember. First, look at the number of participants in the study. The number of participants decreased by some 50% from the start to the finish of the study. In other words the study populations at the start and finish of the study were different. That should have caused the study to be thrown out. Next look at the cumulative cardiac incidents for the people on Vioxx and the people on the placebo. They were statistically identical for the first 18 months. Then the people taking the placebo stopped having cardiac incidents. It literally went to zero. I was asking myself how that could happen when I finally realized that this demonstrated the amazing curative power of the placebo. If you take a placebo for 18 months you will no longer have cardiac problems. I concluded that the study didn’t show that Vioxx caused cardiac problems, but rather that the placebo cured cardiac problems.

Jackie Presser and Harold Friedman bought thousands of Isreali Bonds for Baker’s Local 19 in Cleveland! They lost Hundreds of Thousands, if not Millions of dollars in funding for a pension fund that is in serious financial trouble! Both Presser and Friedman, like Mandel, were staunch ZIONISTS!

I can’t say about the German soldiers being better.
Sounds reasonable, but such comparisons are as hard to make fairly as are claims of drug efficacy.
Certainly the Germans were better prepared.

Some of their superiority might be home field advantage.
I notice that the Confederacy outfought the Union repeatedly with less armament, but failed entirely at the 2 crucial attempts to invade the Union.
Easier lines of supply and familiarity with the area explain the Confederate’s record better than the idea of intrinsic superiority of their soldiers.
Each side fought better on its own ground.
So, also, I expect with the Germans, although I am not averse to the idea of their superiority.

I more strongly object to the better weapons claim.
Tanks, yes, but not aircraft or rifles.
The German infantry was equipped with bolt action rifles while the American was equipped with the semi-automatic M1 Garand.
The introduction of the P-51 fighter in the middle of the war ensured the Germans lost air superiority.

When it comes to technical innovation and the support equipment which turned out to be at least as important as the weapons, there’s no contest.
Radar, code breaking, espionage, transport, sonar, and the Manhattan Project beat the German advantage in rocketry, jet planes, and machine guns.
This isn’t to say that German engineering and design weren’t superior.
They were and may still be, but who could beat a country which could muster the means to put a radar set inside an anti-aircraft shell in an age of vacuum tubes?
This while the Germans were still using horses to transport artillery.

Just would like to clarify that this was an online exclusive clip. They did not air this clip and do not plan to ever air it on TV.

I’ve actually noticed a similar trend with corporations creating online content with harder left signals they know would alienate television viewers. A few years back Mattel created some online Barbie ads with a young boy who was obviously supposed to be gay/effeminate; they didn’t put in on TV but still got some Social Justice points with the left.

As for the Simpsons itself, I still watch occasionally. The first eight seasons are some of the greatest television ever and, while it’s obviously not close to the show it used to be, it’s still pleasant and occasionally shows flashes of the golden era. Overall it’s still less SJW compromised than most TV shows.

Like the clueless whore who suddenly decides it would be fun to gang-bang the entire Sudanese soccer team, Sweden’s Deputy Prime Minister, Åsa Romson, burst into tears as she announced a moratorium on asylum seekers, saying: “We simply can’t do any more.”

It's more Brave New World than 1984 in style if not substance. In many ways worse – this is harder to overthrow because the outer party forms a majority of the population. The dissidents are few and far between.

I’m an Asian HYP grad. I applaud this article for being so extremely well researched and insightful. It’s an excellent indictment of the arbitrariness and cultural favoritism concentrated in the hands of a very small group of unqualified and ideologically driven admissions officers. And I hasten to add that I am a liberal Democratic, an avid Obama supporter, and a strong proponent of correcting income inequality and combating discrimination in the workplace.

To me, the most compelling exhibit was the one towards the end which showed the % relative representation of enrolled students to highly-qualified students (I wish the article labeled the exhibits). This chart shows that in the Ivies, which administer highly subjective admission criteria, Jews are overrepresented by 3-4x, but in the California schools and MIT, which administer more objective criteria, Jews are overrepresented by only 0-50%, a range that can easily be explained by methodology or randomness.

This single exhibit is unequivocal evidence to me of systematic bias in the Ivy League selection process, with Jews as the primary beneficiary. I tend to agree with the author this this bias is unlikely to be explicit, but likely the result of cultural favoritism, with a decision-making body that is heavily Jewish tending to favor the activities, accomplishments, personalities, etc. of Jewish applicants.

The author has effectively endorsed one of the core tenets of modern liberalism – that human beings tend to favor people who look and act like themselves. It’s why institutions dominated by white males tend to have pro-white male biases. The only twist here is that the decision-making body in this instance (Ivy League admissions committees) is white-Jewish, not white-Gentile.

So if you’re a liberal like me, let’s acknowledge that everyone is racist and sexist toward their own group, and what we have here is Jews favoring Jews. We can say that without being anti-semitic, just like we can say that men favor men without being anti-male, or whites favor whites without being anti-white.

"That still begs the question: why are white Ukraine, Moldova, Appalachia etc so poor? Isn't the thesis of the HBD crowd that whites have higher IQs and higher IQs lead to prosperity?"

– Opportunity and hardship probably plays a role- The Ukraine for instance, was under the foot of the the Soviets until the breakup of the Soviet Union. It takes a while to readjust. In addition, the Ukraine was subjected to state implemented famines, etc that seemed to be designed to try to wipe them out as a people during their domination.

I've been told that West VA has been avoided by a lot of businesses because shipping in and out of there is troublesome with poor, winding mountainous roads. Low commerce, low money for schools, public health, etc. Coal mining and strip clubs do well there, though. Some ski slopes as well. But these occupations largely don't require a degree, so probably there is some brain drain going on with intellectuals going elsewhere.

Lastly, not all whites are alike. Some white ethnicities have IQs that average 110 or higher, some have IQs that average ~90. That's a pretty big split, on par with the difference btwn the white average and black average.

The statement that Mormons did not want to be considered christians in the 1930’s is not true. The army categorized soldiers into religions such as Jew, Catholic, Protestant… At the time it was considered that if you were a Christian you were either a Catholic or some religion that at one time or another broke off from the Catholic church, or in there words, protestant. Mormons felt like they did not fit into either of these categorizes and so they choose “other”. Had the option been available to choose “Christian-other” They would have choosen this. Since the church’s foundation the offical name has always been called “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints”.