The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Bill Clinton Denounced for Denouncing Murderous Blacks Hopped Up on Crack
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From Slate:

Fire Bill Clinton

No one is doing more damage to Hillary’s campaign than her husband.

By Michelle Goldberg

I wonder if there’s a part of Bill Clinton that doesn’t really want Hillary Clinton to become president, particularly if she has to distance herself from his legacy to do so. How else to explain why one of the world’s most talented and agile politicians is so consistently flat-footed and destructive when advocating on his wife’s behalf? How else to explain his terrible and destined-to-be-viral confrontation Thursday with Black Lives Matter protesters in Philadelphia?

It started when the demonstrators interrupted Bill Clinton’s speech to protest his draconian 1994 crime bill, which, among other things, expanded the scope of the death penalty, enshrined “three-strikes” provisions into federal law, and allocated almost $10 billion in funding for prison construction. That bill is now widely seen as contributing to the human catastrophe of mass incarceration. Hillary Clinton is proposing a diametrically different approach to criminal justice, and even Bill Clinton renounced the law last year, though today, bafflingly, he went back to defending it.

“I don’t know how you would characterize the gang leaders who got 13-year-olds hopped up on crack and sent them out into the street to murder other African American children,” he shouted at the protesters. “Maybe you thought they were good citizens. She didn’t. She didn’t! You are defending the people who kill the lives you say matter.” The crowd cheered, but most Hillary supporters who watch it online will be aghast, if only out of political self-interest. Right-wing outlets like the Daily Caller and the Weekly Standard rushed, naturally, to post video of Bill’s hectoring.

At a time when Hillary Clinton is dependent on black voters and campaigning with mothers who’ve lost sons to police violence, Bill Clinton yoked her to his own discredited policies. He reminded everyone that, in defense of his bill, she’d once spoken about underage “superpredators,” language she has since apologized for. Then, Bill Clinton aped the maddening right-wing tendency to derail conversations about criminal justice abuses by invoking black-on-black crime. He might as well have said, “All lives matter!”

Not that!

 
Hide 120 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Considering that they are 2 White people who know more about how Black people think than myself, Steve or any commenters here I am sure they’re doing the smart thing.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @anony-mouse

    and rabid zionists to boot

  2. You know Cenk really wanted to say that Bill was literally Hitler in this clip.

  3. It worked with sister soulja, but that was after he had the nomination locked up.

    • Replies: @gruff
    @sf

    That was also a different demographic time. Plates are shifting.

  4. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    If there weren’t Michelle Goldbergs using their high IQs and verbal facility to spin these events every time they happened, even most liberals would respond to them with a natural, common sense reaction, such as, for example, agreeing with Bill’s comments here. We’d have a much more rational public discourse.

    • Agree: gruff, Vendetta, AndrewR
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    @Anonymous

    Nah. It's a pendulum thing. Crime is low now, despite the recent Ferguson Effect, and incarceration rates are high. And no one remembers that there were blacks demanding strict drug laws in the early '90s.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    , @abcd
    @Anonymous

    "If there weren’t Michelle Goldbergs using their high IQs and verbal facility..."

    Inferiority complex.

  5. At a time when Hillary Clinton is dependent on black voters and campaigning with mothers who’ve lost sons to police violence, …

    Haven’t an order of magnitude more black mothers lost sons to black thugs than to the cops?

    • Replies: @Diversity is Wrong
    @iSteveFan

    Sure, similar to how whites are killed by police at a proportionately higher rate than blacks. But these are mere facts.

    Replies: @NOTA

    , @Alec Leamas
    @iSteveFan

    The finger of blame points outward, never inward for our perpetually oppressed.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

    , @Clyde
    @iSteveFan

    Black leadership (such as it it) pisses outside the tent. Not inside because this would require some real world self-refection and honesty plus there is lots of money to be made in mau-mauing stupid whites in gov't. When you come right down to it American blacks want to get the same never ending paycheck as casino Indians.

    , @AndrewR
    @iSteveFan

    Probably two orders of magnitude more if you only include unjustified homicide by the cops. Not that many blacks seem to think cops have a right to self-defense.

    , @Forbes
    @iSteveFan

    Facts inconvenient to The Narrative will always be ignored.

    , @Connecticut Famer
    @iSteveFan

    You're preaching to the choir. The people who should be listening--aren't. And they won't, because that Ivy-educated mandarins who control the Democrat Party have them brainwashed so they can use them as a cudgel to beat over the heads of the people the Democrat Party hates the most--middle and lower middle class white America.

  6. I’d make a pithy comment about Fox Butterfield, but it appears that some guy named James Taranto has cornered that market.

  7. @iSteveFan

    At a time when Hillary Clinton is dependent on black voters and campaigning with mothers who’ve lost sons to police violence, ...
     
    Haven't an order of magnitude more black mothers lost sons to black thugs than to the cops?

    Replies: @Diversity is Wrong, @Alec Leamas, @Clyde, @AndrewR, @Forbes, @Connecticut Famer

    Sure, similar to how whites are killed by police at a proportionately higher rate than blacks. But these are mere facts.

    • Replies: @NOTA
    @Diversity is Wrong

    The public is awash in things they know that aren't so. This is one of the ways the media screw us over, mostly without quite even meaning to.

    Replies: @Forbes

  8. @iSteveFan

    At a time when Hillary Clinton is dependent on black voters and campaigning with mothers who’ve lost sons to police violence, ...
     
    Haven't an order of magnitude more black mothers lost sons to black thugs than to the cops?

    Replies: @Diversity is Wrong, @Alec Leamas, @Clyde, @AndrewR, @Forbes, @Connecticut Famer

    The finger of blame points outward, never inward for our perpetually oppressed.

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @Alec Leamas


    The finger of blame points outward
     
    It’s like a freakish belly button, protruding obscenely under a Tony Montana t-shirt.
  9. “Right-wing outlets like the Daily Caller and the Weekly Standard rushed, naturally, to post video of Bill’s hectoring.”

    Those evil “right-wing outlets”. Publicizing the public comments of a former President on a matter of public policy. How despicable.

    Michelle Goldberg doesn’t seem to realize that criticizing BLM protestors might actually be popular among a lot of voters – even Democratic voters. Probably, a lot of white and oriental Democrats have as much black-fatigue as do Republican voters, even though they might not say it. Perhaps Bill is providing a “Sister Soulja” sound-bite for his wifes’ campaigns’ benefit. Who knows – if he could still fly back to Little Rock and sign a death-warrant for a retarded black murderer, he might have done that too.

    • Replies: @gruff
    @Mr. Anon


    Perhaps Bill is providing a “Sister Soulja” sound-bite for his wifes’ campaigns’ benefit.
     
    I wonder if they secretly polled about Sanders's Seattle cave-in. A relative in Seatown tells me that went down like a lead balloon among Sanders whites. That was ages ago though.

    Replies: @AndrewR

    , @Bill Jones
    @Mr. Anon

    What makes you think Zionist sink holes like The Weekly Standard are Right Wing ?

  10. Bubba should know by now that he cannot say that which cannot be said – be it true to the facts or not. He should know that #BlackLivesMatter is satire at its best – and give the group a comedic welcome.

  11. “Then, Bill Clinton aped”. An article about POC and they reference “apes”? It’s 2016!

    • Replies: @gruff
    @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever...

    Dogwhistling. Apewhistling?

  12. Realpolitik guess: the Southern primaries are over, so Clinton doesn’t need the black vote any more (she knows she has them for the general). She needs to recapture the ethnic white / union white vote that is going over to Bernie or Trump.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Space Ghost

    @Space Ghost
    Exactly. New York and Pennsylvania primaries are coming up , so HRC needs to grab white, rural, blue collar votes from Bernie.

    Replies: @Clyde

    , @Sid
    @Space Ghost

    That's plausible. I think another thing is that Bill Clinton is known for being a bit of a hot head, and he lost his temper. He's almost surely proud of how crime rates dropped hard under his presidency, and he's proud of his crime bill for making that happen*. He's probably sick of having feign regret.

    A few years ago, Stephen Pinker specifically, if a bit wryly, praised Clinton for causing crime rates to drop. There's a lot to dislike about Bill Clinton, but he did buck the soft-on-crime tendencies of the 1960s Democrats and worked with Republicans to increase law enforcement. In contrast, BLM is a truly evil movement, built on top of and fueled by deceit, hysteria and mass violence. Good for Bill Clinton to denounce BLM.

    *I doubt his policies alone caused the drop, but Clinton is an egomaniac so he likely believes he was the main reason why crime rates went down.

    Replies: @ATX Hipster, @Buffalo Joe

    , @Anonym
    @Space Ghost

    This.

    Now the Southern primaries are over, BLM can be discarded. Even in the general, what are the blacks going to do? Vote Republican? Maybe the talented Truth is going to, the rest not so much.

    Replies: @snorlax, @gruff

    , @Malcolm X-Lax
    @Space Ghost

    Bingo! Hillary was totally on board with this! Totally transparent.

  13. @Alec Leamas
    @iSteveFan

    The finger of blame points outward, never inward for our perpetually oppressed.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

    The finger of blame points outward

    It’s like a freakish belly button, protruding obscenely under a Tony Montana t-shirt.

  14. “I don’t know how you would characterize the gang leaders who got 13-year-olds hopped up on crack and sent them out into the street to murder other African American children,”

    Gotta love this recidivist ol’ school duffer with his old school terminology *hopped up on X, Y or Z* and trying to induce a sistah soulja moment(s) for Hillary

  15. Bill Clinton said that? Perhaps Mr. Trump has shifted the Overton Window.

  16. @Space Ghost
    Realpolitik guess: the Southern primaries are over, so Clinton doesn't need the black vote any more (she knows she has them for the general). She needs to recapture the ethnic white / union white vote that is going over to Bernie or Trump.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Sid, @Anonym, @Malcolm X-Lax


    Exactly. New York and Pennsylvania primaries are coming up , so HRC needs to grab white, rural, blue collar votes from Bernie.

    • Replies: @Clyde
    @Anonymous


    Exactly. New York and Pennsylvania primaries are coming up , so HRC needs to grab white, rural, blue collar votes from Bernie.
     
    Needs nothing from Bernie. Hillary is the 2016 Bob Dole and has this locked down. She is virtue signalling for the upcomming general election
  17. Sid says:
    @Space Ghost
    Realpolitik guess: the Southern primaries are over, so Clinton doesn't need the black vote any more (she knows she has them for the general). She needs to recapture the ethnic white / union white vote that is going over to Bernie or Trump.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Sid, @Anonym, @Malcolm X-Lax

    That’s plausible. I think another thing is that Bill Clinton is known for being a bit of a hot head, and he lost his temper. He’s almost surely proud of how crime rates dropped hard under his presidency, and he’s proud of his crime bill for making that happen*. He’s probably sick of having feign regret.

    A few years ago, Stephen Pinker specifically, if a bit wryly, praised Clinton for causing crime rates to drop. There’s a lot to dislike about Bill Clinton, but he did buck the soft-on-crime tendencies of the 1960s Democrats and worked with Republicans to increase law enforcement. In contrast, BLM is a truly evil movement, built on top of and fueled by deceit, hysteria and mass violence. Good for Bill Clinton to denounce BLM.

    *I doubt his policies alone caused the drop, but Clinton is an egomaniac so he likely believes he was the main reason why crime rates went down.

    • Replies: @ATX Hipster
    @Sid


    He’s almost surely proud of how crime rates dropped hard under his presidency, and he’s proud of his crime bill for making that happen*. He’s probably sick of having feign regret.
     
    Considering conservative ire at the time over his presidency, it's funny to think how many conservatives would commit heinous acts if it would replace BHO with Slick Willy.

    Honestly, when you look at, say, his DADT policy for the military, in light of the current World War T, it's a testament to the power of his popularity among libs that his image hasn't been retconned into being a right-wing extremist.

    Replies: @AndrewR

    , @Buffalo Joe
    @Sid

    Sid, Other than the sleaze factor, I actually like Bill. Oh, and the fact that he is a Dem. Oh, and he brought us Hillary. Otherwise, he's ok.

  18. @Space Ghost
    Realpolitik guess: the Southern primaries are over, so Clinton doesn't need the black vote any more (she knows she has them for the general). She needs to recapture the ethnic white / union white vote that is going over to Bernie or Trump.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Sid, @Anonym, @Malcolm X-Lax

    This.

    Now the Southern primaries are over, BLM can be discarded. Even in the general, what are the blacks going to do? Vote Republican? Maybe the talented Truth is going to, the rest not so much.

    • Replies: @snorlax
    @Anonym

    I doubt it. It's the whole raison d'être of the modern left. Look at how they went apeshit over Ferguson on their way to massive losses in 2014.

    , @gruff
    @Anonym


    Now the Southern primaries are over, BLM can be discarded.
     
    BLM as the American Right Sector. Interesting idea.
  19. @Anonym
    @Space Ghost

    This.

    Now the Southern primaries are over, BLM can be discarded. Even in the general, what are the blacks going to do? Vote Republican? Maybe the talented Truth is going to, the rest not so much.

    Replies: @snorlax, @gruff

    I doubt it. It’s the whole raison d’être of the modern left. Look at how they went apeshit over Ferguson on their way to massive losses in 2014.

  20. @sf
    It worked with sister soulja, but that was after he had the nomination locked up.

    Replies: @gruff

    That was also a different demographic time. Plates are shifting.

  21. @Mr. Anon
    "Right-wing outlets like the Daily Caller and the Weekly Standard rushed, naturally, to post video of Bill’s hectoring."

    Those evil "right-wing outlets". Publicizing the public comments of a former President on a matter of public policy. How despicable.

    Michelle Goldberg doesn't seem to realize that criticizing BLM protestors might actually be popular among a lot of voters - even Democratic voters. Probably, a lot of white and oriental Democrats have as much black-fatigue as do Republican voters, even though they might not say it. Perhaps Bill is providing a "Sister Soulja" sound-bite for his wifes' campaigns' benefit. Who knows - if he could still fly back to Little Rock and sign a death-warrant for a retarded black murderer, he might have done that too.

    Replies: @gruff, @Bill Jones

    Perhaps Bill is providing a “Sister Soulja” sound-bite for his wifes’ campaigns’ benefit.

    I wonder if they secretly polled about Sanders’s Seattle cave-in. A relative in Seatown tells me that went down like a lead balloon among Sanders whites. That was ages ago though.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @gruff

    I've always disagreed with Sanders about a lot, but I respected him until the Seattle thing. The president of the US should have at somewhat of a backbone. If he won't stand up to a couple of pentulant blacktivists, whom will he stand up to?

  22. @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever...
    "Then, Bill Clinton aped". An article about POC and they reference "apes"? It's 2016!

    Replies: @gruff

    Dogwhistling. Apewhistling?

  23. Blacks are out of play, at this point – they’re not going to Sanders, and they’re not going Republican. If Hillary peels off a potential Republican vote as a result of Sista Souljah II, it’s a gain for her and a loss for the Republican, whereas a black vote is only a gain for her. Besides, the purple states are noted for their lack of blacks – what does Hillary care if she loses a black vote in Los Angeles?

    They’ve already got a spreadsheet with all the projections worked out. These people are professionals, after all.

    Goldberg is either mendacious or just plain stupid.

    • Replies: @Cwhatfuture
    @tsotha

    Goldberg is stupid. Hillary has the nomination locked up and the Clintons are back peddling fast to get closer to the center for the general.

    , @AndrewR
    @tsotha

    I think you still have to be pretty bright to write for Slate. Mendacity would be the most parsimonious explanation for Goldberg's article.

  24. @Anonym
    @Space Ghost

    This.

    Now the Southern primaries are over, BLM can be discarded. Even in the general, what are the blacks going to do? Vote Republican? Maybe the talented Truth is going to, the rest not so much.

    Replies: @snorlax, @gruff

    Now the Southern primaries are over, BLM can be discarded.

    BLM as the American Right Sector. Interesting idea.

  25. @Anonymous
    @Space Ghost

    @Space Ghost
    Exactly. New York and Pennsylvania primaries are coming up , so HRC needs to grab white, rural, blue collar votes from Bernie.

    Replies: @Clyde

    Exactly. New York and Pennsylvania primaries are coming up , so HRC needs to grab white, rural, blue collar votes from Bernie.

    Needs nothing from Bernie. Hillary is the 2016 Bob Dole and has this locked down. She is virtue signalling for the upcomming general election

  26. I’ve gained a grudging respect for Bill over the past 15 years or so. The 90’s were pretty nice compared to the recent past.

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    @no name

    And non of it his fault.

    Replies: @no name

  27. @tsotha
    Blacks are out of play, at this point - they're not going to Sanders, and they're not going Republican. If Hillary peels off a potential Republican vote as a result of Sista Souljah II, it's a gain for her and a loss for the Republican, whereas a black vote is only a gain for her. Besides, the purple states are noted for their lack of blacks - what does Hillary care if she loses a black vote in Los Angeles?

    They've already got a spreadsheet with all the projections worked out. These people are professionals, after all.

    Goldberg is either mendacious or just plain stupid.

    Replies: @Cwhatfuture, @AndrewR

    Goldberg is stupid. Hillary has the nomination locked up and the Clintons are back peddling fast to get closer to the center for the general.

  28. The slogan Black Lives Matter damns with neutral praise.

    Remember Hurricane Katrina? Just as reports were coming out that maybe things were more dire that first assessed, GW Bush tells the hapless FEMA head “… and Brownie, you’re doing a heck of a job!” Seemed sincere enough, but the actual words can be taken as praise or distancing sarcasm.

    Back to BLM. Of course black lives matter. Heck, terrorists’ lives matter. Anything and anyone that can affect one’s life, matters. This particular black suspect’s life mattered a great deal to his victim, although she didn’t know it until it was too late.

    If it were not for his black life, and the agency made possible by it, she would still be living her nonblack life, which also mattered. Whether or not BLM wants to admit it.

    • Agree: Nico
    • Replies: @Kylie
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    From the linked article: "Her family released a statement at the presser Thursday, which was read out by UT President Gregory L. Fenves: 'Our beloved daughter and sister and friend was taken from us too soon.'

    The statement said how Weiser was looking forward to visiting family in Japan that summer and was a passionate and dedicated dancer and student - and was very happy to be at UT.

    They added that while she loved being on stage she never sought the spotlight off it and the last thing she would want is to be a 'poster child for any cause'.

    'She would not wish us to be stuck in sadness and would want us to keep living life to the fullest and we will try and do that,' the statement concluded. "

    Their family member has been brutally murdered but they manage to slip some none-too-subtle virtue signaling into their public statement of grief. They--and presumably their murdered family member--are part of the problem. Zero sympathy for any of them and zero ***** given.

  29. If we’re going to be stuck with Hillary at least we get Bill once and awhile.

  30. @anony-mouse
    Considering that they are 2 White people who know more about how Black people think than myself, Steve or any commenters here I am sure they're doing the smart thing.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    and rabid zionists to boot

  31. @iSteveFan

    At a time when Hillary Clinton is dependent on black voters and campaigning with mothers who’ve lost sons to police violence, ...
     
    Haven't an order of magnitude more black mothers lost sons to black thugs than to the cops?

    Replies: @Diversity is Wrong, @Alec Leamas, @Clyde, @AndrewR, @Forbes, @Connecticut Famer

    Black leadership (such as it it) pisses outside the tent. Not inside because this would require some real world self-refection and honesty plus there is lots of money to be made in mau-mauing stupid whites in gov’t. When you come right down to it American blacks want to get the same never ending paycheck as casino Indians.

  32. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    ugh, i’m so sick of liberals going on about black people and white people using drugs at the same rate, but blacks getting arrested for it at a higher rate than whites.

    Black people are more likely to commit crime in general than white people , and this is particularity true of violent crimes, crimes that demand a police response. So because blacks are more likely to commit crime in general than whites, blacks are more likely to encounter police officers than whites. And because blacks are more likely to encounter police officers than whites, they are more likely to get booked for drug use than whites.

    • Replies: @gruff
    @Anonymous

    Blacks have a cultural need to publicly flout whitey's rules. Thus they commit crime more flagrantly than do whites. Going to prison now functions as a male initiation rite in the black community.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @tris, @Harry Baldwin

    , @Threecranes
    @Anonymous

    Blacks I've known are generally interested in four things: getting laid, getting high, watching sports on TV and fried chicken. A drug induced stupor is their default state. Their mental ability is unimpaired by their doping because there isn't much there to impair to begin with. A black man's creativity and his unique contribution to wider culture is in concocting and brewing new highs, which is why they are disproportionately arrested for drug use.

    Because they aren't needed as workers and have a surfeit of leisure time with which to pursue their agenda of staying buzzed, blacks once again (as in Rap) are showing us the way forward. Increasingly, the problem in the future will be what to do with surplus humanity that has no useful purpose. Keeping them stoned zombies is as good a solution as any. Huxley may not have foreseen that people won't need to be forced to take drugs to quell their restiveness, they may demand drugs to silence the torment that is the human condition. They will willingly choose to stay buzzed right up to the grave, oblivious to the demands that teleological individuality imposes on us.

    Evolution designed us to live with a certain amount of worry and anxiousness, which purposeful behavior relieves. But this also causes discomfort and blacks like being free from worry, hence their drug use. This is the way forward for those made irrelevant by robots etc. Once again, the wise, magical Negro has shown us the way.

    Replies: @Diversity Heretic

  33. Is bill’s locking up of black people the cause for the decline in crime noticed in the 2016 edition of ‘the color of crime’?

  34. What is amazing is how uninformed Cenk is. For example he said something about marijuana use being the same among blacks and whites, something that is long since debunked.

    The man is literally an engine of misinformation.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @Redking

    I actually believe that to be true. I have known many, many Caucasian cannabis connoisseurs. Of course the reasons for incarceration disparities go far beyond anti-black racism (if that's even a significant factor at all in 2016).

    Replies: @snorlax

    , @Forbes
    @Redking

    Evidence of The Narrative at work. If they're gonna sell it to the public, they'd better be full-faith believers. Being generally uninformed makes one a perfect vessel for the misinformation of The Narrative.

  35. @Sid
    @Space Ghost

    That's plausible. I think another thing is that Bill Clinton is known for being a bit of a hot head, and he lost his temper. He's almost surely proud of how crime rates dropped hard under his presidency, and he's proud of his crime bill for making that happen*. He's probably sick of having feign regret.

    A few years ago, Stephen Pinker specifically, if a bit wryly, praised Clinton for causing crime rates to drop. There's a lot to dislike about Bill Clinton, but he did buck the soft-on-crime tendencies of the 1960s Democrats and worked with Republicans to increase law enforcement. In contrast, BLM is a truly evil movement, built on top of and fueled by deceit, hysteria and mass violence. Good for Bill Clinton to denounce BLM.

    *I doubt his policies alone caused the drop, but Clinton is an egomaniac so he likely believes he was the main reason why crime rates went down.

    Replies: @ATX Hipster, @Buffalo Joe

    He’s almost surely proud of how crime rates dropped hard under his presidency, and he’s proud of his crime bill for making that happen*. He’s probably sick of having feign regret.

    Considering conservative ire at the time over his presidency, it’s funny to think how many conservatives would commit heinous acts if it would replace BHO with Slick Willy.

    Honestly, when you look at, say, his DADT policy for the military, in light of the current World War T, it’s a testament to the power of his popularity among libs that his image hasn’t been retconned into being a right-wing extremist.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @ATX Hipster

    Well hindsight is not always 20/20. Many say Reagan would be considered a RINO today but he is still the late god-emperor of the GOP. Something seems wrong there. Now I don't know how leftist his policies were because I don't remember his administration and I don't really feel like reading about it. I do know the left generally only talks about him to chastize him for his late response to HIV.

    Replies: @snorlax, @Harry Baldwin, @Bill, @Das

  36. I’m more inclined to ascribe Bill Clinton’s remarks to Elderly Tourette Syndrome than to cold rational political calculations–it just seemed too spontaneous. Bill is, after all, from the South and grew up in close proximity to blacks. He’s not at all surprised that a “get tough on crime bill,” put a lot more blacks in prison: that was a feature, not a bug.

    • Replies: @Anonym
    @Diversity Heretic

    Bill is a consummate actor, but underneath it all there is a cold, hard and prodigious intellect. Watch his "definition of is" video if you have any doubt. If you watch the BLM video, Bill is very eloquent with what he says. A tack to the center is a layup for the Clinton camp. And right at the perfect moment. Not coincidence.

    Replies: @Diversity Heretic

    , @Mr. Anon
    @Diversity Heretic

    "I’m more inclined to ascribe Bill Clinton’s remarks to Elderly Tourette Syndrome than to cold rational political calculations–it just seemed too spontaneous."

    It's possible. With all his heart problems, Bill might not be thinking too clearly. Maybe he figures he's old enough to start telling the truth. Then again, after so many years of being Bill Clinton, does he even know how anymore? Does he even know what the truth is?

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

  37. The comments on that Goldberg piece: top ones are 97% pro-Clinton! Theory of pivoting to center gains support.

  38. @Mr. Anon
    "Right-wing outlets like the Daily Caller and the Weekly Standard rushed, naturally, to post video of Bill’s hectoring."

    Those evil "right-wing outlets". Publicizing the public comments of a former President on a matter of public policy. How despicable.

    Michelle Goldberg doesn't seem to realize that criticizing BLM protestors might actually be popular among a lot of voters - even Democratic voters. Probably, a lot of white and oriental Democrats have as much black-fatigue as do Republican voters, even though they might not say it. Perhaps Bill is providing a "Sister Soulja" sound-bite for his wifes' campaigns' benefit. Who knows - if he could still fly back to Little Rock and sign a death-warrant for a retarded black murderer, he might have done that too.

    Replies: @gruff, @Bill Jones

    What makes you think Zionist sink holes like The Weekly Standard are Right Wing ?

  39. @Anonymous
    ugh, i'm so sick of liberals going on about black people and white people using drugs at the same rate, but blacks getting arrested for it at a higher rate than whites.

    Black people are more likely to commit crime in general than white people , and this is particularity true of violent crimes, crimes that demand a police response. So because blacks are more likely to commit crime in general than whites, blacks are more likely to encounter police officers than whites. And because blacks are more likely to encounter police officers than whites, they are more likely to get booked for drug use than whites.

    Replies: @gruff, @Threecranes

    Blacks have a cultural need to publicly flout whitey’s rules. Thus they commit crime more flagrantly than do whites. Going to prison now functions as a male initiation rite in the black community.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    @gruff

    "Blacks have a cultural need to publicly flout whitey’s rules. Thus they commit crime more flagrantly than do whites. Going to prison now functions as a male initiation rite in the black community."

    A Jewish male does not become a real man until he has a Bar Mitzvah. A Black male does not become a real man until he goes to prison.

    Prison is Bar Mitzvah for male Negroes.

    Replies: @gruff

    , @tris
    @gruff

    i think its more ingrained in the culture than being a response to whitey.
    in formerly white countries, now turned black rule, such as south africa, crime is just as rampant. it comes with the culture, and is also a function of potential victims. whites are easy prey, and when all the wealthier whites have left, crime rates simply drop because the gangs have run out of victims

    , @Harry Baldwin
    @gruff

    Blacks have a cultural need to publicly flout whitey’s rules.

    And remarkably, they even feel the need to flout whitey's rules in all-black countries.

  40. @no name
    I've gained a grudging respect for Bill over the past 15 years or so. The 90's were pretty nice compared to the recent past.

    Replies: @Bill Jones

    And non of it his fault.

    • Replies: @no name
    @Bill Jones

    By that logic the last 8 years aren't Obama's fault.

    Replies: @Brutusale

  41. @Space Ghost
    Realpolitik guess: the Southern primaries are over, so Clinton doesn't need the black vote any more (she knows she has them for the general). She needs to recapture the ethnic white / union white vote that is going over to Bernie or Trump.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Sid, @Anonym, @Malcolm X-Lax

    Bingo! Hillary was totally on board with this! Totally transparent.

  42. It’s okay because Bill’s holding a trump card for Hillary… maybe.

  43. the maddening right-wing tendency to derail conversations about criminal justice abuses by invoking black-on-black crime

    Why would it be “maddening” unless there were an obvious way to shoot it down?

    Answer: because there isn’t, and it contradicts the narrative.

    The author slipped up big time, but she certainly gave a nice bit of ammo for us to trot out the next time some Cuckservative tries to protest about the left’s “good intentions.”

  44. @Bill Jones
    @no name

    And non of it his fault.

    Replies: @no name

    By that logic the last 8 years aren’t Obama’s fault.

    • Replies: @Brutusale
    @no name

    Bubba BJ was able to ride the tech bubble almost to the end of his term, and was smart enough not to do much to screw it up.

    The Lightbringer isn't that smart.

  45. @Anonymous
    If there weren't Michelle Goldbergs using their high IQs and verbal facility to spin these events every time they happened, even most liberals would respond to them with a natural, common sense reaction, such as, for example, agreeing with Bill's comments here. We'd have a much more rational public discourse.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @abcd

    Nah. It’s a pendulum thing. Crime is low now, despite the recent Ferguson Effect, and incarceration rates are high. And no one remembers that there were blacks demanding strict drug laws in the early ’90s.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Dave Pinsen

    Right, that's why areas with the lowest crime, like conservative districts in flyover country, are clamoring for soft-on-crime policies, while areas like Ferguson aren't. Oh wait, it's the exact opposite. In reality, most people have no problem with tough-on-crime policies and instinctively understand that it leads to lower crime. Until they get brain damaged by the sort of verbal gymnastics you see in the original post.

  46. @Diversity Heretic
    I'm more inclined to ascribe Bill Clinton's remarks to Elderly Tourette Syndrome than to cold rational political calculations--it just seemed too spontaneous. Bill is, after all, from the South and grew up in close proximity to blacks. He's not at all surprised that a "get tough on crime bill," put a lot more blacks in prison: that was a feature, not a bug.

    Replies: @Anonym, @Mr. Anon

    Bill is a consummate actor, but underneath it all there is a cold, hard and prodigious intellect. Watch his “definition of is” video if you have any doubt. If you watch the BLM video, Bill is very eloquent with what he says. A tack to the center is a layup for the Clinton camp. And right at the perfect moment. Not coincidence.

    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    @Anonym

    All right, I'm persuaded--it was a deliberate statement and not Elderly Tourette Syndrome. But is Hillary now thinking general election, because she feels that she's already sewn up the nomination, or does she want to do better in the upcoming primaries? If the latter, how does Bill's statement persuade someone who's even inclined to vote for Sanders to vote for her? Seems to me that most Sanders supporters are also BLM supporters, or at least inclined in that direction. Maybe I'm missing something.

    Replies: @Anonym

  47. • Replies: @AndrewR
    @Anonym

    Lmao. Larry got chewed up by the PC machine at Hahvahd and now he is choosing to try to grind Trump up too. Pathetic.

    , @Jack Hanson
    @Anonym

    Steve as well.

  48. Das says:

    Looks like Hillary is dropping BLM and the Social Justice left like a hot rock now that she no longer needs them.

    As I argued before, at least with Hillary we know she’s *lying* when she acts like the Social Justice Warrior in Chief. With Bernie, he might just be serious.

    This new positioning isn’t just a play to whites. In the video you a bunch of older blacks clapping and cheering as Bill tells off the protester. They aren’t fans of “superpredators” either.

    • Replies: @snorlax
    @Das


    In the video you a bunch of older blacks clapping and cheering as Bill tells off the protester.
     
    That doesn't tell you anything. They'd be cheering if he [Bill Clinton] were extolling the virtues of low taxes, Ronald Reagan and ice hockey.

    (See the Howard Stern segment after election 2008 where he asked Harlem passersby whether they supported Obama because he's pro-Iraq War or because he's pro-life).

    , @RamonaQ
    @Das

    Great observation. Anecdotally, I have heard that older blacks are fed up of BLM shenanigans.

    This is a brilliant move by Bill. He gained a LOT of sympathy points, specifically with precisely the disgruntled centrists that she needs to win over from the GOP.

    Replies: @EriK

  49. @gruff
    @Anonymous

    Blacks have a cultural need to publicly flout whitey's rules. Thus they commit crime more flagrantly than do whites. Going to prison now functions as a male initiation rite in the black community.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @tris, @Harry Baldwin

    “Blacks have a cultural need to publicly flout whitey’s rules. Thus they commit crime more flagrantly than do whites. Going to prison now functions as a male initiation rite in the black community.”

    A Jewish male does not become a real man until he has a Bar Mitzvah. A Black male does not become a real man until he goes to prison.

    Prison is Bar Mitzvah for male Negroes.

    • Replies: @gruff
    @Jefferson

    LOL - Bar Mitzvah. Geddit?

  50. @Das
    Looks like Hillary is dropping BLM and the Social Justice left like a hot rock now that she no longer needs them.

    As I argued before, at least with Hillary we know she's *lying* when she acts like the Social Justice Warrior in Chief. With Bernie, he might just be serious.

    This new positioning isn't just a play to whites. In the video you a bunch of older blacks clapping and cheering as Bill tells off the protester. They aren't fans of "superpredators" either.

    Replies: @snorlax, @RamonaQ

    In the video you a bunch of older blacks clapping and cheering as Bill tells off the protester.

    That doesn’t tell you anything. They’d be cheering if he [Bill Clinton] were extolling the virtues of low taxes, Ronald Reagan and ice hockey.

    (See the Howard Stern segment after election 2008 where he asked Harlem passersby whether they supported Obama because he’s pro-Iraq War or because he’s pro-life).

  51. @gruff
    @Anonymous

    Blacks have a cultural need to publicly flout whitey's rules. Thus they commit crime more flagrantly than do whites. Going to prison now functions as a male initiation rite in the black community.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @tris, @Harry Baldwin

    i think its more ingrained in the culture than being a response to whitey.
    in formerly white countries, now turned black rule, such as south africa, crime is just as rampant. it comes with the culture, and is also a function of potential victims. whites are easy prey, and when all the wealthier whites have left, crime rates simply drop because the gangs have run out of victims

  52. @iSteveFan

    At a time when Hillary Clinton is dependent on black voters and campaigning with mothers who’ve lost sons to police violence, ...
     
    Haven't an order of magnitude more black mothers lost sons to black thugs than to the cops?

    Replies: @Diversity is Wrong, @Alec Leamas, @Clyde, @AndrewR, @Forbes, @Connecticut Famer

    Probably two orders of magnitude more if you only include unjustified homicide by the cops. Not that many blacks seem to think cops have a right to self-defense.

  53. @Diversity is Wrong
    @iSteveFan

    Sure, similar to how whites are killed by police at a proportionately higher rate than blacks. But these are mere facts.

    Replies: @NOTA

    The public is awash in things they know that aren’t so. This is one of the ways the media screw us over, mostly without quite even meaning to.

    • Replies: @Forbes
    @NOTA

    You can be assured that the media screwing over the public is quite purposeful. The public is awash in things that aren't so, whether they know it or not is another matter. The whole point of PC is to eliminate that knowing conversation. As Steve refers to it: the crime of noticing.

  54. This author is an idiot. Bill *is* a skilled politician. He’s trying to help Hillary where she’s the most vulnerable: the white middle class. Especially, men.

    At this point in the election, pandering to blacks is counter productive. Same goes for Republicans and pandering to the evangelicals. Who the hell else will those groups vote for? They’re not crossing to the other side.

    Bill is trying to pull her trainwreck of a campaign back on track.

  55. @Anonym
    @Diversity Heretic

    Bill is a consummate actor, but underneath it all there is a cold, hard and prodigious intellect. Watch his "definition of is" video if you have any doubt. If you watch the BLM video, Bill is very eloquent with what he says. A tack to the center is a layup for the Clinton camp. And right at the perfect moment. Not coincidence.

    Replies: @Diversity Heretic

    All right, I’m persuaded–it was a deliberate statement and not Elderly Tourette Syndrome. But is Hillary now thinking general election, because she feels that she’s already sewn up the nomination, or does she want to do better in the upcoming primaries? If the latter, how does Bill’s statement persuade someone who’s even inclined to vote for Sanders to vote for her? Seems to me that most Sanders supporters are also BLM supporters, or at least inclined in that direction. Maybe I’m missing something.

    • Replies: @Anonym
    @Diversity Heretic

    I think the answer is both. And during the primaries, it is also about getting unmotivated people to turn out. Hillary would not be cannibalizing support from Bernie bros so much as persuading lukewarm Democrats who want to know that they are getting something of the centrist Clinton brand and not a complete SJW panderer, and to pull the lever for her. Best to do it early and before Bernie does it, so he looks like a copycat if/when he does.

  56. Clinton can’t help it, he’s part of a racist legacy in just being a Rhodes Scholar.

    #RhodesMustFall

    University of Oxford
    Opinion

    Oxford’s Cecil Rhodes statue must fall – it stands in the way of inclusivity
    Yussef Robinson

    Black and minority ethnic students have long felt marginalised by Oxford’s culture. Let’s discuss these issues, free from the shadow of the architect of apartheid

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/19/rhodes-fall-oxford-university-inclusivity-black-students

    Students have also called for the university to take radical action to increase the numbers of black and ethnic minority students attending Oxford…

    An Oxford University spokesman reiterated that it was keen to build bridges with students over issues of representation.

    “We have invited Rhodes Must Fall to discuss a number of issues including the need to address the representation of BAME [black and minority ethnic] students at the university; the ongoing process of curriculum development and welfare provision for BME students,” he said.

    “We hope they will accept the opportunity to work with staff and other students on creating a more inclusive university community.”

    http://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/mar/09/oxford-students-plan-rhodes-must-fall-anti-colonialism-march

  57. http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/sparring-in-clinton-sanders-race-gets-nasty-worries-dems/

    The Clintons have what Cruz called New York values (a remark he will have cause to bitterly regret). Sanders has accused Clinton of not being qualified, he started to play “Hardball” after the brutal mugging he got from Chris Mathews, whose wife just happened to get a load of donations from Clinton’s associates.

    http://abc7.com/news/sanders-goes-for-a-walk-along-busy-nyc-street/1281719/
    An influential segment of NYC will be entranced by one of their own getting near the top from a standing start. Sanders getting this far on crowd funding shows he can enthuse and lead. Clinton is all big insiders/ corporations and trade deals she negotiated but now repudiates saying she didn’t understand what they meant. Clinton is not going to be a difficult candidate to beat.

  58. @Das
    Looks like Hillary is dropping BLM and the Social Justice left like a hot rock now that she no longer needs them.

    As I argued before, at least with Hillary we know she's *lying* when she acts like the Social Justice Warrior in Chief. With Bernie, he might just be serious.

    This new positioning isn't just a play to whites. In the video you a bunch of older blacks clapping and cheering as Bill tells off the protester. They aren't fans of "superpredators" either.

    Replies: @snorlax, @RamonaQ

    Great observation. Anecdotally, I have heard that older blacks are fed up of BLM shenanigans.

    This is a brilliant move by Bill. He gained a LOT of sympathy points, specifically with precisely the disgruntled centrists that she needs to win over from the GOP.

    • Replies: @EriK
    @RamonaQ

    Somehow she's gonna blow it.

  59. @gruff
    @Mr. Anon


    Perhaps Bill is providing a “Sister Soulja” sound-bite for his wifes’ campaigns’ benefit.
     
    I wonder if they secretly polled about Sanders's Seattle cave-in. A relative in Seatown tells me that went down like a lead balloon among Sanders whites. That was ages ago though.

    Replies: @AndrewR

    I’ve always disagreed with Sanders about a lot, but I respected him until the Seattle thing. The president of the US should have at somewhat of a backbone. If he won’t stand up to a couple of pentulant blacktivists, whom will he stand up to?

  60. @tsotha
    Blacks are out of play, at this point - they're not going to Sanders, and they're not going Republican. If Hillary peels off a potential Republican vote as a result of Sista Souljah II, it's a gain for her and a loss for the Republican, whereas a black vote is only a gain for her. Besides, the purple states are noted for their lack of blacks - what does Hillary care if she loses a black vote in Los Angeles?

    They've already got a spreadsheet with all the projections worked out. These people are professionals, after all.

    Goldberg is either mendacious or just plain stupid.

    Replies: @Cwhatfuture, @AndrewR

    I think you still have to be pretty bright to write for Slate. Mendacity would be the most parsimonious explanation for Goldberg’s article.

  61. @Redking
    What is amazing is how uninformed Cenk is. For example he said something about marijuana use being the same among blacks and whites, something that is long since debunked.

    The man is literally an engine of misinformation.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Forbes

    I actually believe that to be true. I have known many, many Caucasian cannabis connoisseurs. Of course the reasons for incarceration disparities go far beyond anti-black racism (if that’s even a significant factor at all in 2016).

    • Replies: @snorlax
    @AndrewR

    I have no doubt that the percentage of whites and blacks who've tried it are about equal, although I'd imagine more blacks toke up regularly. Still, probably close to the lowest black-white ratio of any crime. Which has something to do with it being just about the least harmful of any "crime."

    (Although, whites probably outnumber blacks among meth and possibly heroin users, where we are getting into the neighborhood of genuine social harm).

  62. You are defending the people who kill the lives you say matter.

    That’s probably the most logical thing I’ve heard a Democrat say since….. well, since Bill Clinton was in office.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @Gunnar von Cowtown

    Logic is a construct of Christian cisheteropatriarchal white supremacy used to silence queer trans women of color who know that feelings trump all always.

    Replies: @Kylie

  63. @ATX Hipster
    @Sid


    He’s almost surely proud of how crime rates dropped hard under his presidency, and he’s proud of his crime bill for making that happen*. He’s probably sick of having feign regret.
     
    Considering conservative ire at the time over his presidency, it's funny to think how many conservatives would commit heinous acts if it would replace BHO with Slick Willy.

    Honestly, when you look at, say, his DADT policy for the military, in light of the current World War T, it's a testament to the power of his popularity among libs that his image hasn't been retconned into being a right-wing extremist.

    Replies: @AndrewR

    Well hindsight is not always 20/20. Many say Reagan would be considered a RINO today but he is still the late god-emperor of the GOP. Something seems wrong there. Now I don’t know how leftist his policies were because I don’t remember his administration and I don’t really feel like reading about it. I do know the left generally only talks about him to chastize him for his late response to HIV.

    • Replies: @snorlax
    @AndrewR

    The "Reagan would be a RINO" stuff is nonsense.

    You and I are around the same age but I've read enough historical material from the time period for it to be obvious—he signed a bill authorizing the death penalty for drug smugglers (not sure what happened with that, probably got ruled unconstitutional), had controversies such as defending Bob Jones University's policy of not admitting black students (and AFAICT never flip-flopped on his opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act) and vetoing sanctions on South Africa, supported the gold standard and making Social Security voluntary in his 1980 campaign, etc etc.

    Replies: @stillCARealist

    , @Harry Baldwin
    @AndrewR

    . . . to chastize him for his late response to HIV.

    I wonder what possible difference it would have made if Reagan had "responded" to it earlier. A lot of politics is just grandstanding, it seems. Maybe some people would be happier if he had made some phony earnest speech like Obama always does, but I doubt it. They're determined to blame him.

    Bush got criticized for flying over New Orleans after Katrina rather than landing and walking around. His reasoning is that he would have been a distraction and impeded the recovery if he had gone to the scene, and he was probably correct, but his enemies were determined to use that against him. The federal government's response to Superstorm Sandy was no more impressive than it was to Katrina, but the press protected Obama and he made sure to get the photo-ops.

    Replies: @snorlax

    , @Bill
    @AndrewR

    There was no late response.

    , @Das
    @AndrewR

    A few people who weren't around at the time call Reagan a "RINO" because after completely obliterating the Democrats and getting his priorities through, he was able to come to the table and make compromises on other issues.

    When he entered office, the top rate of income tax was 70% and when he left it was 26%. The percentage of the workforce who were union members went from 25% to 15%.

    He was the first president in decades who just flat out refused to meet with the NAACP and other civil rights groups.

    He was closely tied to the religious right in a way that not even GWB could match. When he finally did give his speech on AIDS in 1987, he wasn't giving the usual politically correct bromides. He blamed the epidemic on gays and drug addicts and told young people to stay abstinent.

    That is to say, for people in the conservative movement at the time, Reagan was an utter dream come true. At the time he was so much more right-wing than any president in living memory, there were no serious complaints.

    Replies: @Not sure

  64. @Anonym
    OT: http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/04/07/larry-summers-trump-an-american-demagogue-profoundly-dangerous/

    Larry Summers has visions of torches and pitchforks.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Jack Hanson

    Lmao. Larry got chewed up by the PC machine at Hahvahd and now he is choosing to try to grind Trump up too. Pathetic.

  65. @Gunnar von Cowtown

    You are defending the people who kill the lives you say matter.
     
    That's probably the most logical thing I've heard a Democrat say since..... well, since Bill Clinton was in office.

    Replies: @AndrewR

    Logic is a construct of Christian cisheteropatriarchal white supremacy used to silence queer trans women of color who know that feelings trump all always.

    • Replies: @Kylie
    @AndrewR

    "Logic is a construct of Christian cisheteropatriarchal white supremacy used to silence queer trans women of color who know that feelings trump all always."

    Your use of "trump" in this context is a microaggression, as indeed it would be in almost any context other than one calling for his death by any means necessary.


    And because you simply can't be too careful these days: /sarc

  66. @Diversity Heretic
    I'm more inclined to ascribe Bill Clinton's remarks to Elderly Tourette Syndrome than to cold rational political calculations--it just seemed too spontaneous. Bill is, after all, from the South and grew up in close proximity to blacks. He's not at all surprised that a "get tough on crime bill," put a lot more blacks in prison: that was a feature, not a bug.

    Replies: @Anonym, @Mr. Anon

    “I’m more inclined to ascribe Bill Clinton’s remarks to Elderly Tourette Syndrome than to cold rational political calculations–it just seemed too spontaneous.”

    It’s possible. With all his heart problems, Bill might not be thinking too clearly. Maybe he figures he’s old enough to start telling the truth. Then again, after so many years of being Bill Clinton, does he even know how anymore? Does he even know what the truth is?

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @Mr. Anon

    Nah, Bill is a master at turning his emotions on and off. Remember how he started tearing up at Ron Brown's funeral when he realized the cameras were on him? He'd been laughing and scratching just moments before. Very little Bill does is accidental. As others have said, Hillary doesn't need any more black primary votes (and where else are blacks gonna go in the general?), so it's time for a little Sister Soldjah.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

  67. @Anonymous
    ugh, i'm so sick of liberals going on about black people and white people using drugs at the same rate, but blacks getting arrested for it at a higher rate than whites.

    Black people are more likely to commit crime in general than white people , and this is particularity true of violent crimes, crimes that demand a police response. So because blacks are more likely to commit crime in general than whites, blacks are more likely to encounter police officers than whites. And because blacks are more likely to encounter police officers than whites, they are more likely to get booked for drug use than whites.

    Replies: @gruff, @Threecranes

    Blacks I’ve known are generally interested in four things: getting laid, getting high, watching sports on TV and fried chicken. A drug induced stupor is their default state. Their mental ability is unimpaired by their doping because there isn’t much there to impair to begin with. A black man’s creativity and his unique contribution to wider culture is in concocting and brewing new highs, which is why they are disproportionately arrested for drug use.

    Because they aren’t needed as workers and have a surfeit of leisure time with which to pursue their agenda of staying buzzed, blacks once again (as in Rap) are showing us the way forward. Increasingly, the problem in the future will be what to do with surplus humanity that has no useful purpose. Keeping them stoned zombies is as good a solution as any. Huxley may not have foreseen that people won’t need to be forced to take drugs to quell their restiveness, they may demand drugs to silence the torment that is the human condition. They will willingly choose to stay buzzed right up to the grave, oblivious to the demands that teleological individuality imposes on us.

    Evolution designed us to live with a certain amount of worry and anxiousness, which purposeful behavior relieves. But this also causes discomfort and blacks like being free from worry, hence their drug use. This is the way forward for those made irrelevant by robots etc. Once again, the wise, magical Negro has shown us the way.

    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    @Threecranes

    If drugs only had the effect of sedating blacks (or other races, for that matter), the solution that you advocate might be meritorious. Huxley's soma caused pleasant deadening sensations. Trouble is, some people take drugs for stimulation, or the drugs have that effect on them. Steve didnit use "hopped up" on crack without a reason!

  68. @gruff
    @Anonymous

    Blacks have a cultural need to publicly flout whitey's rules. Thus they commit crime more flagrantly than do whites. Going to prison now functions as a male initiation rite in the black community.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @tris, @Harry Baldwin

    Blacks have a cultural need to publicly flout whitey’s rules.

    And remarkably, they even feel the need to flout whitey’s rules in all-black countries.

  69. @Sid
    @Space Ghost

    That's plausible. I think another thing is that Bill Clinton is known for being a bit of a hot head, and he lost his temper. He's almost surely proud of how crime rates dropped hard under his presidency, and he's proud of his crime bill for making that happen*. He's probably sick of having feign regret.

    A few years ago, Stephen Pinker specifically, if a bit wryly, praised Clinton for causing crime rates to drop. There's a lot to dislike about Bill Clinton, but he did buck the soft-on-crime tendencies of the 1960s Democrats and worked with Republicans to increase law enforcement. In contrast, BLM is a truly evil movement, built on top of and fueled by deceit, hysteria and mass violence. Good for Bill Clinton to denounce BLM.

    *I doubt his policies alone caused the drop, but Clinton is an egomaniac so he likely believes he was the main reason why crime rates went down.

    Replies: @ATX Hipster, @Buffalo Joe

    Sid, Other than the sleaze factor, I actually like Bill. Oh, and the fact that he is a Dem. Oh, and he brought us Hillary. Otherwise, he’s ok.

  70. @Anonym
    OT: http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/04/07/larry-summers-trump-an-american-demagogue-profoundly-dangerous/

    Larry Summers has visions of torches and pitchforks.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Jack Hanson

    Steve as well.

  71. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    The slogan Black Lives Matter damns with neutral praise.

    Remember Hurricane Katrina? Just as reports were coming out that maybe things were more dire that first assessed, GW Bush tells the hapless FEMA head “… and Brownie, you’re doing a heck of a job!” Seemed sincere enough, but the actual words can be taken as praise or distancing sarcasm.

    Back to BLM. Of course black lives matter. Heck, terrorists’ lives matter. Anything and anyone that can affect one’s life, matters. This particular black suspect’s life mattered a great deal to his victim, although she didn’t know it until it was too late.

    If it were not for his black life, and the agency made possible by it, she would still be living her nonblack life, which also mattered. Whether or not BLM wants to admit it.

    Replies: @Kylie

    From the linked article: “Her family released a statement at the presser Thursday, which was read out by UT President Gregory L. Fenves: ‘Our beloved daughter and sister and friend was taken from us too soon.’

    The statement said how Weiser was looking forward to visiting family in Japan that summer and was a passionate and dedicated dancer and student – and was very happy to be at UT.

    They added that while she loved being on stage she never sought the spotlight off it and the last thing she would want is to be a ‘poster child for any cause’.

    ‘She would not wish us to be stuck in sadness and would want us to keep living life to the fullest and we will try and do that,’ the statement concluded. ”

    Their family member has been brutally murdered but they manage to slip some none-too-subtle virtue signaling into their public statement of grief. They–and presumably their murdered family member–are part of the problem. Zero sympathy for any of them and zero ***** given.

  72. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    The professional protesters are doing what they do best and that’s protest. Nothing else comes from this group. They have no capability for anything except to make noise.
    Having a black president was advertised as something that was going to promote greater harmony. Yet we’ve gotten just the opposite, more racial strife than ever before since the 60’s, much of it the handiwork of the current administration. This is all very fatiguing; I’m all ‘raced-out’ at this point. When it comes to this I just reach for the ‘mute’ button.

    • Replies: @Antonymous
    @anonymous

    "All raced-out"

    Yes, you're not alone. In summer 2012, at the height of Trayvon Martin hand-wringing, I finally reached saturation with the obsessive cant of "race", "unarmed black teen", etc etc daily. I'd shut off NPR following mention of the word "race" and found myself listening fewer than ten minutes most mornings. And, like this pre-meditated slaughter in Pittsburgh, "race" was never mentioned in the context of black perpetrators and hate crimes against white people.

    The media bias tells us that white life is cheap -- it's the murderers' race that must be protected, not even to be released in an effort to catch the criminals. If the FBI violent crime statistics showed rough parity between blacks and whites, I might understand the concerns of BLM and race advocates. But murder commission rates are some 8 times greater for blacks than for whites. The media, horrifically, sees statistical knowledge as the threat and fetes BLM advocacy while shutting down, frankly suppressing as in the case of this journalist, any anger toward black degeneracy.

    Replies: @WJ

  73. @iSteveFan

    At a time when Hillary Clinton is dependent on black voters and campaigning with mothers who’ve lost sons to police violence, ...
     
    Haven't an order of magnitude more black mothers lost sons to black thugs than to the cops?

    Replies: @Diversity is Wrong, @Alec Leamas, @Clyde, @AndrewR, @Forbes, @Connecticut Famer

    Facts inconvenient to The Narrative will always be ignored.

  74. @Redking
    What is amazing is how uninformed Cenk is. For example he said something about marijuana use being the same among blacks and whites, something that is long since debunked.

    The man is literally an engine of misinformation.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Forbes

    Evidence of The Narrative at work. If they’re gonna sell it to the public, they’d better be full-faith believers. Being generally uninformed makes one a perfect vessel for the misinformation of The Narrative.

  75. @NOTA
    @Diversity is Wrong

    The public is awash in things they know that aren't so. This is one of the ways the media screw us over, mostly without quite even meaning to.

    Replies: @Forbes

    You can be assured that the media screwing over the public is quite purposeful. The public is awash in things that aren’t so, whether they know it or not is another matter. The whole point of PC is to eliminate that knowing conversation. As Steve refers to it: the crime of noticing.

  76. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Ordinarily, I’d say Bill’s instincts are correct for moving towards the center for the general election, but the Dems are still in the primaries, and this looks like a big mistake to do it so early. White liberals are so brainwashed that blacks have become magic unicorns to them, and if you criticize blacks in any way, shape, or form, liberals think you’re evil–and that you’re an old fogey who needs to be put out to pasture, much the same way liberals in the 1960s used to view elderly white Southerners. Liberals are only going to back Bernie in even greater numbers after this.

    White liberals aren’t voting for Bernie because of his stance on race. They’re voting for Bernie because he’s not Hillary. They think Hillary is appalling. This is the blind spot in the Clinton polling. Heck, I’ve heard many liberals froth at the mouth about what Hillary has done in Honduras as SoS, and Republicans are so out of it they haven’t even heard about that issue.

    The problem is, for many liberals, the Clintons are too old, too set in their ways, too 1980s, too greedy, too corrupt, too status quo, and with race signaling like this, liberals won’t tolerate it. They have made themselves into an Inquisition. We are living in an age of left-wing McCarthyism, with a bizarre mind-set that has taken over the levers and controls of society. As noted in the other article about the female broadcaster, liberals think it’s normal to fire employees for saying the same stuff that Bill just said. This is a very different era from the 1980s.

    If lefties go even farther, they’ll begin to morph into the sort of extreme nut-jobism that took over in communist societies like Pol Pot’s Cambodia, Mao’s China, and Stalin’s Russia. The only thing protecting our basic rights are our present laws, which the left keeps encroaching on and trying to alter to suit their crazy ideology.

    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    @Anon

    I had the same reaction-if this is a pivot to the center, it's too soon, but maybe the Clinton's know something about the nomination process that's not available to the rest of us. I don't see a 74-year old Jewish senator from the whitest, most rural state in the union being the 2016 Democratic Party standard-bearer, no matter how many people feel the Berne!

    By the way, what did Hillary Clinton do in Honduras? That got by me, too!

  77. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    @Anonymous

    Nah. It's a pendulum thing. Crime is low now, despite the recent Ferguson Effect, and incarceration rates are high. And no one remembers that there were blacks demanding strict drug laws in the early '90s.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Right, that’s why areas with the lowest crime, like conservative districts in flyover country, are clamoring for soft-on-crime policies, while areas like Ferguson aren’t. Oh wait, it’s the exact opposite. In reality, most people have no problem with tough-on-crime policies and instinctively understand that it leads to lower crime. Until they get brain damaged by the sort of verbal gymnastics you see in the original post.

  78. @AndrewR
    @Redking

    I actually believe that to be true. I have known many, many Caucasian cannabis connoisseurs. Of course the reasons for incarceration disparities go far beyond anti-black racism (if that's even a significant factor at all in 2016).

    Replies: @snorlax

    I have no doubt that the percentage of whites and blacks who’ve tried it are about equal, although I’d imagine more blacks toke up regularly. Still, probably close to the lowest black-white ratio of any crime. Which has something to do with it being just about the least harmful of any “crime.”

    (Although, whites probably outnumber blacks among meth and possibly heroin users, where we are getting into the neighborhood of genuine social harm).

  79. @AndrewR
    @ATX Hipster

    Well hindsight is not always 20/20. Many say Reagan would be considered a RINO today but he is still the late god-emperor of the GOP. Something seems wrong there. Now I don't know how leftist his policies were because I don't remember his administration and I don't really feel like reading about it. I do know the left generally only talks about him to chastize him for his late response to HIV.

    Replies: @snorlax, @Harry Baldwin, @Bill, @Das

    The “Reagan would be a RINO” stuff is nonsense.

    You and I are around the same age but I’ve read enough historical material from the time period for it to be obvious—he signed a bill authorizing the death penalty for drug smugglers (not sure what happened with that, probably got ruled unconstitutional), had controversies such as defending Bob Jones University’s policy of not admitting black students (and AFAICT never flip-flopped on his opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act) and vetoing sanctions on South Africa, supported the gold standard and making Social Security voluntary in his 1980 campaign, etc etc.

    • Replies: @stillCARealist
    @snorlax

    such as defending Bob Jones University’s policy of not admitting black students

    What?

    Their controversy was to ban interracial dating, insofar as they allowed dating at all. That ban was rescinded in the 90's, as if anybody really cared. Just something for the liberal outsider daisies to get their panties in a knot about.

  80. Matra says: • Website

    Black Lives Matter has arrived in Canada (black population 3%) big time.

    Over the last two days a prominent member of the organisation has tweeted “”Plz Allah give me strength to not cuss/kill these men and white folks out here today. Plz plz plz,” and another member is now being sued:

    An outspoken member of Black Lives Matter Toronto is being sued after leaving her job with UofT’s student union with a $277,508 severance deal that included 1,975 hours of overtime.

    The union wants former executive director Sandra “Sandy” Hudson and her co-defendants — who allegedly approved the package — to jointly pay it back, along with another $200,000 in damages for breach of fiduciary duty.

    The severance payment equals approximately 10% of the union’s annual operating budget.

    In its statement of claim, the union alleges Hudson received 3.6 years of her base salary after only working there 2 1/2 years.

    Hudson, the claim says, filed for 1,975 hours of overtime on April 1, 2015. Before that date, it says, she “had never recorded any overtime hours into her personnel file.”

    Toronto Sun

    Professional protesters always know where the money is.

    BLM members will also lead Toronto’s gay Pride Parade this summer.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    @Matra

    "BLM members will also lead Toronto’s gay Pride Parade this summer."

    A member of Black Lies Matter named Deray McKesson is a fag who is running for mayor of Baltimore. BLM here in The U.S was originally started by 3 dykes.

    There is seems to be a disproportionate number of Homosexuals in the Black Lies Matter movement. I wonder why that is?

    Replies: @dumpstersquirrel

  81. The walkback begins!

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/08/politics/bill-clinton-black-lives-matter/index.html

    Bill Clinton, while campaigning for his wife’s presidential bid Friday, addressed a fiery exchange with Black Lives Matter protesters earlier in the week, saying it bothers him when protesters drown him out but added that he “almost” wanted to apologize for his response.

  82. @Mr. Anon
    @Diversity Heretic

    "I’m more inclined to ascribe Bill Clinton’s remarks to Elderly Tourette Syndrome than to cold rational political calculations–it just seemed too spontaneous."

    It's possible. With all his heart problems, Bill might not be thinking too clearly. Maybe he figures he's old enough to start telling the truth. Then again, after so many years of being Bill Clinton, does he even know how anymore? Does he even know what the truth is?

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

    Nah, Bill is a master at turning his emotions on and off. Remember how he started tearing up at Ron Brown’s funeral when he realized the cameras were on him? He’d been laughing and scratching just moments before. Very little Bill does is accidental. As others have said, Hillary doesn’t need any more black primary votes (and where else are blacks gonna go in the general?), so it’s time for a little Sister Soldjah.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @Jim Don Bob

    "Nah, Bill is a master at turning his emotions on and off. Remember how he started tearing up at Ron Brown’s funeral when he realized the cameras were on him? He’d been laughing and scratching just moments before."

    Yes, that was noteworthy. Is there a term for such a type as that; "Sociopath", perhaps?

    However, my favorite story about the bottomless hypocrisy and cynicism of Bill Clinton was a story I remember about his signing of the Defence of Marriage act: He tried to have it both ways - to not alienate middle America while simultaneously not alienating all those wealthy homosexual Democratic party backers. He literally denounced the bill during the signing ceremony - while he was in the act of signing it.

    A comment about Clinton that Jesse Jackson once made has always stuck with me. Jackson has made a living as a grievance monger, a mau-mauing huckster, and - essentially - an extortionist. And yet, he is not without some intelligence and observational powers, and he still seems to have a sense of decency, however atrophied. He once said of Bill Clinton: "at bottom, the man is nothing more than an appetite".

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

  83. @AndrewR
    @ATX Hipster

    Well hindsight is not always 20/20. Many say Reagan would be considered a RINO today but he is still the late god-emperor of the GOP. Something seems wrong there. Now I don't know how leftist his policies were because I don't remember his administration and I don't really feel like reading about it. I do know the left generally only talks about him to chastize him for his late response to HIV.

    Replies: @snorlax, @Harry Baldwin, @Bill, @Das

    . . . to chastize him for his late response to HIV.

    I wonder what possible difference it would have made if Reagan had “responded” to it earlier. A lot of politics is just grandstanding, it seems. Maybe some people would be happier if he had made some phony earnest speech like Obama always does, but I doubt it. They’re determined to blame him.

    Bush got criticized for flying over New Orleans after Katrina rather than landing and walking around. His reasoning is that he would have been a distraction and impeded the recovery if he had gone to the scene, and he was probably correct, but his enemies were determined to use that against him. The federal government’s response to Superstorm Sandy was no more impressive than it was to Katrina, but the press protected Obama and he made sure to get the photo-ops.

    • Replies: @snorlax
    @Harry Baldwin


    . . . to chastize him for his late response to HIV.

    I wonder what possible difference it would have made if Reagan had “responded” to it earlier.
     

    My apologies for the wall of text; I got a bit carried away.

    The curious "Reagan didn't mention AIDS" criticism is something of a bizarre modern liberal bastardization of a legitimate line of complaint regarding the Reagan administration.

    The response of the 80's FDA to AIDS could be characterized as somewhere between recklessly incompetent and outright sadistic.

    Although scientists and doctors had been literally begging the FDA to mandate testing of the nation's blood supply as soon as effective HIV tests were discovered in 1982, the agency dragged its feet for three long years until 1985, during which time the number of known cases exploded from hundreds to hundreds of thousands.

    Thousands of people, predominantly heterosexual and particularly hemophiliacs, were infected with HIV due to blood transfusions during that time, while the number who've been infected by faulty blood transfusions since testing started can be counted on your fingers.

    The FDA's rationale for its inaction was utter nonsense; they claimed they didn't want to cause panic (perhaps not spreading the disease would be a good way to prevent panic?) and that they didn't want blood donors to feel stigmatized by the assumption they might be gays or junkies (I'm sure the hemophiliacs who died slow, agonizing deaths were happy that nobody felt stigmatized).

    Then there's the even bigger issue of the drug approval process. In light of its being an exponentially-spreading pandemic of the deadliest disease ever known to man, doctors, scientists and patients again literally begged, pleaded with and (in the case of ACT UP) pulled desperate publicity stunts to try to convince the FDA to expedite its normally years-long drug approval process for HIV treatments and to allow public access to experimental treatments.

    The FDA however did no such thing, keeping every promising treatment in approval purgatory for years and years, forcing the few HIV patients who had the resources and connections to become criminals by smuggling in drugs from overseas. Patients and doctors were prosecuted or had their medical licenses revoked for obtaining treatment for themselves or others.

    All three drugs in the now-standard "cocktail" that keeps HIV in permanent remission, and reduces the transmission rate to near zero, were known and being trialled in the 80s, but didn't receive approval until the early 90s, after hundreds of thousands in the US alone had died.

    The one antiretroviral the FDA did approve in the 80's (but still well after it was available elsewhere), AZT, was itself a fiasco. Though the FDA claims the rigor of its clinical studies justify the long drug approval process, the FDA's AZT studies were at best severely flawed.

    Doctors and patients quickly discovered that at the extremely high dosage approved by the FDA, AZT was ineffective or even had a paradoxical effect that caused patients to worsen. But they also found that at much lower dosages, AZT was indeed effective at holding off the onset of AIDS by up to several years.

    Doctors and patient groups submitted reams upon reams of evidence to the FDA regarding their flawed dosage recommendation for AZT, but the agency once again completely refused to budge until the 90's. Tens and maybe hundreds of thousands of people might've survived until the discovery of the truly effective three-drug cocktail (which contains AZT at the low dose), had the FDA done so.

    Large parts of the gay community, seeing the FDA promote the "poison" AZT while barring access to promising treatments, stopped believing anything the government said about HIV/AIDS.

    All the way into the early 2000s or so (and to a lesser extent even today) ideas caught on with many gay men (and assorted delusionists like Christine Maggiore) such as that all HIV treatments, even the three-drug cocktail, are "poison," that condoms can't prevent the spread of HIV, or that the HIV virus is harmless and doesn't cause AIDS.

    To be sure, crackpots will always be around, but they were able to appear much more credible to a community that had good reason to think the officials offering the mainstream line lacked credibility. And so even more people were unnecessarily infected even after it became known how to prevent and treat HIV.

    So yeah, the Reagan FDA really dropped the ball. Even if certain iSteve readers love the idea of thousands of gay men dying horrible deaths, thousands of straight people were infected and died where the FDA could have easily prevented it.

    Was it Reagan's fault? While the Bush/Clinton FDA did behave more reasonably, I'd probably say it's more an extremely unfortunate case of bureaucratitis than anything Reagan did (the FDA started becoming more reasonable during his administration, after all). But it's nevertheless something that went very wrong under his watch and therefore a legitimate criticism.

    However, the FDA, the regulations it produces and its drug approval process are all sacred to the modern left, so the actual criticisms of the Reagan administration that were made by contemporary AIDS activists are nowadays not to be spoken of.

    Liberals, when discussing groups like ACT UP, will offer vague praise without mentioning anything about those groups' messages and goals, and pivot to the weird "Reagan didn't say AIDS" thing. (Which is a somewhat legimitate if very minor point—it could have cleared up a lot of ignorance and misinformation if a nationally-known figure made it clear early on that AIDS was sexually-transmitted and could be prevented by using condoms).

    It's one of the odder epicycles and penumbras of today's leftism. The AIDS activists of the time, like Randy Shilts (And the Band Played On) and Larry Kramer (ACT UP) weren't afraid to take on a liberal shibboleth like the FDA—their lives were literally on the line!

    Nor were they unwilling to point the finger at their own community: that HIV had spread so quickly amongst gay men because they practiced unprotected sex with many partners, and were too slow to change their habits once AIDS arrived on the scene, and that gay rights activists had helped its spread by preventing, until it was too late, the closure of the NYC and SF bathhouses by public health authorities.

    But nowadays, just as the FDA can do no wrong, it's even more an article of faith that no wound suffered by a victim group could ever be self-inflicted, even if inadvertently or even on an individual basis.

    It's gotten to the point that there's been a largely-successful campaign to rehabilitate the memory of the villain of And the Band Played On, the Québécois flight attendant and psychopath Gaëtan Dugas.

    The Centers for Disease Control traced every AIDS outbreak in North America back to Dugas, who in the late 70s somehow figured out he was dying of a strange disease, took it upon himself to have as many sex partners in as many cities as possible, and after he finished, told each one "I have the gay cancer; now you do too."

    But per recent ideological developments he was actually just swell because a turn-of-the-century Congolese hunter was the real "Patient Zero," not Dugas. (A strawman; neither Shilts nor the CDC claimed Dugas was the first person to contract HIV, rather that he was Patient Zero of the 70's/80's North American outbreak, which is true).

    Replies: @Das

  84. It’s amazing what passes for “racism” now. Pretty soon they’ll be demanding full immunity from the law.

  85. @AndrewR
    @ATX Hipster

    Well hindsight is not always 20/20. Many say Reagan would be considered a RINO today but he is still the late god-emperor of the GOP. Something seems wrong there. Now I don't know how leftist his policies were because I don't remember his administration and I don't really feel like reading about it. I do know the left generally only talks about him to chastize him for his late response to HIV.

    Replies: @snorlax, @Harry Baldwin, @Bill, @Das

    There was no late response.

  86. @Jefferson
    @gruff

    "Blacks have a cultural need to publicly flout whitey’s rules. Thus they commit crime more flagrantly than do whites. Going to prison now functions as a male initiation rite in the black community."

    A Jewish male does not become a real man until he has a Bar Mitzvah. A Black male does not become a real man until he goes to prison.

    Prison is Bar Mitzvah for male Negroes.

    Replies: @gruff

    LOL – Bar Mitzvah. Geddit?

  87. As others have mentioned, it may be the Clintons positioning themselves in a way that “endears” them to conservatives in the general election, but I’m not sure that was the intent. I remember when Bill said, during his administration, “three strikes and your out,” many conservatives scoffed at the notion of serial violent offenders getting additional two strikes in the first place. There was nothing the Clintons could do to placate the most staunch conservatives back then, and now they realize that same is true of the most staunch black liberals. An eye opening moment for Bill Clinton.

  88. I honestly don’t see how Hillary herself — or even Bill Clinton on her behalf — can have a Sister Souljah moment and profit from it politically.

    In Bill Clinton’s day as President, this moment was survivable in the media and did him considerable political good. But today, denouncing BLM, and sticking to that message, would kill any support Hillary would get from the media, no matter who her political opponent would be. She would be torn to pieces in the media, no less viciously than Trump. The media and the narrative have moved far, far beyond the 90s in what is considered tolerable in any politician to say.

    For the media, the very point of denouncing Trump as they have is to save the Narrative from all attacks. If Hillary were to sabotage that Narrative — and especially because she is supposed to be its natural ally — they will leave her for dead.

    If Hillary is denounced with a vehemence by the same parties denouncing Trump, Hillary can little profit from the stream of stories portraying Trump as a nutcase. Her relative “acceptability” is about the only thing she has going for her vs. Trump.

  89. @Threecranes
    @Anonymous

    Blacks I've known are generally interested in four things: getting laid, getting high, watching sports on TV and fried chicken. A drug induced stupor is their default state. Their mental ability is unimpaired by their doping because there isn't much there to impair to begin with. A black man's creativity and his unique contribution to wider culture is in concocting and brewing new highs, which is why they are disproportionately arrested for drug use.

    Because they aren't needed as workers and have a surfeit of leisure time with which to pursue their agenda of staying buzzed, blacks once again (as in Rap) are showing us the way forward. Increasingly, the problem in the future will be what to do with surplus humanity that has no useful purpose. Keeping them stoned zombies is as good a solution as any. Huxley may not have foreseen that people won't need to be forced to take drugs to quell their restiveness, they may demand drugs to silence the torment that is the human condition. They will willingly choose to stay buzzed right up to the grave, oblivious to the demands that teleological individuality imposes on us.

    Evolution designed us to live with a certain amount of worry and anxiousness, which purposeful behavior relieves. But this also causes discomfort and blacks like being free from worry, hence their drug use. This is the way forward for those made irrelevant by robots etc. Once again, the wise, magical Negro has shown us the way.

    Replies: @Diversity Heretic

    If drugs only had the effect of sedating blacks (or other races, for that matter), the solution that you advocate might be meritorious. Huxley’s soma caused pleasant deadening sensations. Trouble is, some people take drugs for stimulation, or the drugs have that effect on them. Steve didnit use “hopped up” on crack without a reason!

  90. @Anon
    Ordinarily, I'd say Bill's instincts are correct for moving towards the center for the general election, but the Dems are still in the primaries, and this looks like a big mistake to do it so early. White liberals are so brainwashed that blacks have become magic unicorns to them, and if you criticize blacks in any way, shape, or form, liberals think you're evil--and that you're an old fogey who needs to be put out to pasture, much the same way liberals in the 1960s used to view elderly white Southerners. Liberals are only going to back Bernie in even greater numbers after this.

    White liberals aren't voting for Bernie because of his stance on race. They're voting for Bernie because he's not Hillary. They think Hillary is appalling. This is the blind spot in the Clinton polling. Heck, I've heard many liberals froth at the mouth about what Hillary has done in Honduras as SoS, and Republicans are so out of it they haven't even heard about that issue.

    The problem is, for many liberals, the Clintons are too old, too set in their ways, too 1980s, too greedy, too corrupt, too status quo, and with race signaling like this, liberals won't tolerate it. They have made themselves into an Inquisition. We are living in an age of left-wing McCarthyism, with a bizarre mind-set that has taken over the levers and controls of society. As noted in the other article about the female broadcaster, liberals think it's normal to fire employees for saying the same stuff that Bill just said. This is a very different era from the 1980s.

    If lefties go even farther, they'll begin to morph into the sort of extreme nut-jobism that took over in communist societies like Pol Pot's Cambodia, Mao's China, and Stalin's Russia. The only thing protecting our basic rights are our present laws, which the left keeps encroaching on and trying to alter to suit their crazy ideology.

    Replies: @Diversity Heretic

    I had the same reaction-if this is a pivot to the center, it’s too soon, but maybe the Clinton’s know something about the nomination process that’s not available to the rest of us. I don’t see a 74-year old Jewish senator from the whitest, most rural state in the union being the 2016 Democratic Party standard-bearer, no matter how many people feel the Berne!

    By the way, what did Hillary Clinton do in Honduras? That got by me, too!

  91. @Diversity Heretic
    @Anonym

    All right, I'm persuaded--it was a deliberate statement and not Elderly Tourette Syndrome. But is Hillary now thinking general election, because she feels that she's already sewn up the nomination, or does she want to do better in the upcoming primaries? If the latter, how does Bill's statement persuade someone who's even inclined to vote for Sanders to vote for her? Seems to me that most Sanders supporters are also BLM supporters, or at least inclined in that direction. Maybe I'm missing something.

    Replies: @Anonym

    I think the answer is both. And during the primaries, it is also about getting unmotivated people to turn out. Hillary would not be cannibalizing support from Bernie bros so much as persuading lukewarm Democrats who want to know that they are getting something of the centrist Clinton brand and not a complete SJW panderer, and to pull the lever for her. Best to do it early and before Bernie does it, so he looks like a copycat if/when he does.

  92. @RamonaQ
    @Das

    Great observation. Anecdotally, I have heard that older blacks are fed up of BLM shenanigans.

    This is a brilliant move by Bill. He gained a LOT of sympathy points, specifically with precisely the disgruntled centrists that she needs to win over from the GOP.

    Replies: @EriK

    Somehow she’s gonna blow it.

  93. @AndrewR
    @Gunnar von Cowtown

    Logic is a construct of Christian cisheteropatriarchal white supremacy used to silence queer trans women of color who know that feelings trump all always.

    Replies: @Kylie

    “Logic is a construct of Christian cisheteropatriarchal white supremacy used to silence queer trans women of color who know that feelings trump all always.”

    Your use of “trump” in this context is a microaggression, as indeed it would be in almost any context other than one calling for his death by any means necessary.

    And because you simply can’t be too careful these days: /sarc

  94. @AndrewR
    @ATX Hipster

    Well hindsight is not always 20/20. Many say Reagan would be considered a RINO today but he is still the late god-emperor of the GOP. Something seems wrong there. Now I don't know how leftist his policies were because I don't remember his administration and I don't really feel like reading about it. I do know the left generally only talks about him to chastize him for his late response to HIV.

    Replies: @snorlax, @Harry Baldwin, @Bill, @Das

    A few people who weren’t around at the time call Reagan a “RINO” because after completely obliterating the Democrats and getting his priorities through, he was able to come to the table and make compromises on other issues.

    When he entered office, the top rate of income tax was 70% and when he left it was 26%. The percentage of the workforce who were union members went from 25% to 15%.

    He was the first president in decades who just flat out refused to meet with the NAACP and other civil rights groups.

    He was closely tied to the religious right in a way that not even GWB could match. When he finally did give his speech on AIDS in 1987, he wasn’t giving the usual politically correct bromides. He blamed the epidemic on gays and drug addicts and told young people to stay abstinent.

    That is to say, for people in the conservative movement at the time, Reagan was an utter dream come true. At the time he was so much more right-wing than any president in living memory, there were no serious complaints.

    • Replies: @Not sure
    @Das

    And yet, just one of those compromises may well have destroyed America .

  95. @Harry Baldwin
    @AndrewR

    . . . to chastize him for his late response to HIV.

    I wonder what possible difference it would have made if Reagan had "responded" to it earlier. A lot of politics is just grandstanding, it seems. Maybe some people would be happier if he had made some phony earnest speech like Obama always does, but I doubt it. They're determined to blame him.

    Bush got criticized for flying over New Orleans after Katrina rather than landing and walking around. His reasoning is that he would have been a distraction and impeded the recovery if he had gone to the scene, and he was probably correct, but his enemies were determined to use that against him. The federal government's response to Superstorm Sandy was no more impressive than it was to Katrina, but the press protected Obama and he made sure to get the photo-ops.

    Replies: @snorlax

    . . . to chastize him for his late response to HIV.

    I wonder what possible difference it would have made if Reagan had “responded” to it earlier.

    My apologies for the wall of text; I got a bit carried away.

    The curious “Reagan didn’t mention AIDS” criticism is something of a bizarre modern liberal bastardization of a legitimate line of complaint regarding the Reagan administration.

    The response of the 80’s FDA to AIDS could be characterized as somewhere between recklessly incompetent and outright sadistic.

    Although scientists and doctors had been literally begging the FDA to mandate testing of the nation’s blood supply as soon as effective HIV tests were discovered in 1982, the agency dragged its feet for three long years until 1985, during which time the number of known cases exploded from hundreds to hundreds of thousands.

    Thousands of people, predominantly heterosexual and particularly hemophiliacs, were infected with HIV due to blood transfusions during that time, while the number who’ve been infected by faulty blood transfusions since testing started can be counted on your fingers.

    The FDA’s rationale for its inaction was utter nonsense; they claimed they didn’t want to cause panic (perhaps not spreading the disease would be a good way to prevent panic?) and that they didn’t want blood donors to feel stigmatized by the assumption they might be gays or junkies (I’m sure the hemophiliacs who died slow, agonizing deaths were happy that nobody felt stigmatized).

    Then there’s the even bigger issue of the drug approval process. In light of its being an exponentially-spreading pandemic of the deadliest disease ever known to man, doctors, scientists and patients again literally begged, pleaded with and (in the case of ACT UP) pulled desperate publicity stunts to try to convince the FDA to expedite its normally years-long drug approval process for HIV treatments and to allow public access to experimental treatments.

    The FDA however did no such thing, keeping every promising treatment in approval purgatory for years and years, forcing the few HIV patients who had the resources and connections to become criminals by smuggling in drugs from overseas. Patients and doctors were prosecuted or had their medical licenses revoked for obtaining treatment for themselves or others.

    All three drugs in the now-standard “cocktail” that keeps HIV in permanent remission, and reduces the transmission rate to near zero, were known and being trialled in the 80s, but didn’t receive approval until the early 90s, after hundreds of thousands in the US alone had died.

    The one antiretroviral the FDA did approve in the 80’s (but still well after it was available elsewhere), AZT, was itself a fiasco. Though the FDA claims the rigor of its clinical studies justify the long drug approval process, the FDA’s AZT studies were at best severely flawed.

    Doctors and patients quickly discovered that at the extremely high dosage approved by the FDA, AZT was ineffective or even had a paradoxical effect that caused patients to worsen. But they also found that at much lower dosages, AZT was indeed effective at holding off the onset of AIDS by up to several years.

    Doctors and patient groups submitted reams upon reams of evidence to the FDA regarding their flawed dosage recommendation for AZT, but the agency once again completely refused to budge until the 90’s. Tens and maybe hundreds of thousands of people might’ve survived until the discovery of the truly effective three-drug cocktail (which contains AZT at the low dose), had the FDA done so.

    Large parts of the gay community, seeing the FDA promote the “poison” AZT while barring access to promising treatments, stopped believing anything the government said about HIV/AIDS.

    All the way into the early 2000s or so (and to a lesser extent even today) ideas caught on with many gay men (and assorted delusionists like Christine Maggiore) such as that all HIV treatments, even the three-drug cocktail, are “poison,” that condoms can’t prevent the spread of HIV, or that the HIV virus is harmless and doesn’t cause AIDS.

    To be sure, crackpots will always be around, but they were able to appear much more credible to a community that had good reason to think the officials offering the mainstream line lacked credibility. And so even more people were unnecessarily infected even after it became known how to prevent and treat HIV.

    So yeah, the Reagan FDA really dropped the ball. Even if certain iSteve readers love the idea of thousands of gay men dying horrible deaths, thousands of straight people were infected and died where the FDA could have easily prevented it.

    Was it Reagan’s fault? While the Bush/Clinton FDA did behave more reasonably, I’d probably say it’s more an extremely unfortunate case of bureaucratitis than anything Reagan did (the FDA started becoming more reasonable during his administration, after all). But it’s nevertheless something that went very wrong under his watch and therefore a legitimate criticism.

    However, the FDA, the regulations it produces and its drug approval process are all sacred to the modern left, so the actual criticisms of the Reagan administration that were made by contemporary AIDS activists are nowadays not to be spoken of.

    Liberals, when discussing groups like ACT UP, will offer vague praise without mentioning anything about those groups’ messages and goals, and pivot to the weird “Reagan didn’t say AIDS” thing. (Which is a somewhat legimitate if very minor point—it could have cleared up a lot of ignorance and misinformation if a nationally-known figure made it clear early on that AIDS was sexually-transmitted and could be prevented by using condoms).

    It’s one of the odder epicycles and penumbras of today’s leftism. The AIDS activists of the time, like Randy Shilts (And the Band Played On) and Larry Kramer (ACT UP) weren’t afraid to take on a liberal shibboleth like the FDA—their lives were literally on the line!

    Nor were they unwilling to point the finger at their own community: that HIV had spread so quickly amongst gay men because they practiced unprotected sex with many partners, and were too slow to change their habits once AIDS arrived on the scene, and that gay rights activists had helped its spread by preventing, until it was too late, the closure of the NYC and SF bathhouses by public health authorities.

    But nowadays, just as the FDA can do no wrong, it’s even more an article of faith that no wound suffered by a victim group could ever be self-inflicted, even if inadvertently or even on an individual basis.

    It’s gotten to the point that there’s been a largely-successful campaign to rehabilitate the memory of the villain of And the Band Played On, the Québécois flight attendant and psychopath Gaëtan Dugas.

    The Centers for Disease Control traced every AIDS outbreak in North America back to Dugas, who in the late 70s somehow figured out he was dying of a strange disease, took it upon himself to have as many sex partners in as many cities as possible, and after he finished, told each one “I have the gay cancer; now you do too.”

    But per recent ideological developments he was actually just swell because a turn-of-the-century Congolese hunter was the real “Patient Zero,” not Dugas. (A strawman; neither Shilts nor the CDC claimed Dugas was the first person to contract HIV, rather that he was Patient Zero of the 70’s/80’s North American outbreak, which is true).

    • Agree: Das
    • Replies: @Das
    @snorlax

    I agree completely. Most experts at the time were highly critical of the Reagan administration's response to AIDS. It's not some sort of crazy demand to expect quick action from the government on any sort of infectious disease outbreak. Other countries, especially in Europe, did a much better job controlling the outbreak.

    A legitimate criticism just sort of morphed over time into this narrative about the saintly gay community being intentionally murdered by Reagan and the Moral Majority.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Mr. Anon

  96. @snorlax
    @Harry Baldwin


    . . . to chastize him for his late response to HIV.

    I wonder what possible difference it would have made if Reagan had “responded” to it earlier.
     

    My apologies for the wall of text; I got a bit carried away.

    The curious "Reagan didn't mention AIDS" criticism is something of a bizarre modern liberal bastardization of a legitimate line of complaint regarding the Reagan administration.

    The response of the 80's FDA to AIDS could be characterized as somewhere between recklessly incompetent and outright sadistic.

    Although scientists and doctors had been literally begging the FDA to mandate testing of the nation's blood supply as soon as effective HIV tests were discovered in 1982, the agency dragged its feet for three long years until 1985, during which time the number of known cases exploded from hundreds to hundreds of thousands.

    Thousands of people, predominantly heterosexual and particularly hemophiliacs, were infected with HIV due to blood transfusions during that time, while the number who've been infected by faulty blood transfusions since testing started can be counted on your fingers.

    The FDA's rationale for its inaction was utter nonsense; they claimed they didn't want to cause panic (perhaps not spreading the disease would be a good way to prevent panic?) and that they didn't want blood donors to feel stigmatized by the assumption they might be gays or junkies (I'm sure the hemophiliacs who died slow, agonizing deaths were happy that nobody felt stigmatized).

    Then there's the even bigger issue of the drug approval process. In light of its being an exponentially-spreading pandemic of the deadliest disease ever known to man, doctors, scientists and patients again literally begged, pleaded with and (in the case of ACT UP) pulled desperate publicity stunts to try to convince the FDA to expedite its normally years-long drug approval process for HIV treatments and to allow public access to experimental treatments.

    The FDA however did no such thing, keeping every promising treatment in approval purgatory for years and years, forcing the few HIV patients who had the resources and connections to become criminals by smuggling in drugs from overseas. Patients and doctors were prosecuted or had their medical licenses revoked for obtaining treatment for themselves or others.

    All three drugs in the now-standard "cocktail" that keeps HIV in permanent remission, and reduces the transmission rate to near zero, were known and being trialled in the 80s, but didn't receive approval until the early 90s, after hundreds of thousands in the US alone had died.

    The one antiretroviral the FDA did approve in the 80's (but still well after it was available elsewhere), AZT, was itself a fiasco. Though the FDA claims the rigor of its clinical studies justify the long drug approval process, the FDA's AZT studies were at best severely flawed.

    Doctors and patients quickly discovered that at the extremely high dosage approved by the FDA, AZT was ineffective or even had a paradoxical effect that caused patients to worsen. But they also found that at much lower dosages, AZT was indeed effective at holding off the onset of AIDS by up to several years.

    Doctors and patient groups submitted reams upon reams of evidence to the FDA regarding their flawed dosage recommendation for AZT, but the agency once again completely refused to budge until the 90's. Tens and maybe hundreds of thousands of people might've survived until the discovery of the truly effective three-drug cocktail (which contains AZT at the low dose), had the FDA done so.

    Large parts of the gay community, seeing the FDA promote the "poison" AZT while barring access to promising treatments, stopped believing anything the government said about HIV/AIDS.

    All the way into the early 2000s or so (and to a lesser extent even today) ideas caught on with many gay men (and assorted delusionists like Christine Maggiore) such as that all HIV treatments, even the three-drug cocktail, are "poison," that condoms can't prevent the spread of HIV, or that the HIV virus is harmless and doesn't cause AIDS.

    To be sure, crackpots will always be around, but they were able to appear much more credible to a community that had good reason to think the officials offering the mainstream line lacked credibility. And so even more people were unnecessarily infected even after it became known how to prevent and treat HIV.

    So yeah, the Reagan FDA really dropped the ball. Even if certain iSteve readers love the idea of thousands of gay men dying horrible deaths, thousands of straight people were infected and died where the FDA could have easily prevented it.

    Was it Reagan's fault? While the Bush/Clinton FDA did behave more reasonably, I'd probably say it's more an extremely unfortunate case of bureaucratitis than anything Reagan did (the FDA started becoming more reasonable during his administration, after all). But it's nevertheless something that went very wrong under his watch and therefore a legitimate criticism.

    However, the FDA, the regulations it produces and its drug approval process are all sacred to the modern left, so the actual criticisms of the Reagan administration that were made by contemporary AIDS activists are nowadays not to be spoken of.

    Liberals, when discussing groups like ACT UP, will offer vague praise without mentioning anything about those groups' messages and goals, and pivot to the weird "Reagan didn't say AIDS" thing. (Which is a somewhat legimitate if very minor point—it could have cleared up a lot of ignorance and misinformation if a nationally-known figure made it clear early on that AIDS was sexually-transmitted and could be prevented by using condoms).

    It's one of the odder epicycles and penumbras of today's leftism. The AIDS activists of the time, like Randy Shilts (And the Band Played On) and Larry Kramer (ACT UP) weren't afraid to take on a liberal shibboleth like the FDA—their lives were literally on the line!

    Nor were they unwilling to point the finger at their own community: that HIV had spread so quickly amongst gay men because they practiced unprotected sex with many partners, and were too slow to change their habits once AIDS arrived on the scene, and that gay rights activists had helped its spread by preventing, until it was too late, the closure of the NYC and SF bathhouses by public health authorities.

    But nowadays, just as the FDA can do no wrong, it's even more an article of faith that no wound suffered by a victim group could ever be self-inflicted, even if inadvertently or even on an individual basis.

    It's gotten to the point that there's been a largely-successful campaign to rehabilitate the memory of the villain of And the Band Played On, the Québécois flight attendant and psychopath Gaëtan Dugas.

    The Centers for Disease Control traced every AIDS outbreak in North America back to Dugas, who in the late 70s somehow figured out he was dying of a strange disease, took it upon himself to have as many sex partners in as many cities as possible, and after he finished, told each one "I have the gay cancer; now you do too."

    But per recent ideological developments he was actually just swell because a turn-of-the-century Congolese hunter was the real "Patient Zero," not Dugas. (A strawman; neither Shilts nor the CDC claimed Dugas was the first person to contract HIV, rather that he was Patient Zero of the 70's/80's North American outbreak, which is true).

    Replies: @Das

    I agree completely. Most experts at the time were highly critical of the Reagan administration’s response to AIDS. It’s not some sort of crazy demand to expect quick action from the government on any sort of infectious disease outbreak. Other countries, especially in Europe, did a much better job controlling the outbreak.

    A legitimate criticism just sort of morphed over time into this narrative about the saintly gay community being intentionally murdered by Reagan and the Moral Majority.

    • Agree: snorlax
    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @Das

    Good post, but ...
    The gay community was vociferous in its opposition to blood testing saying it would stigmatize them. Yes, Randy Shilts was an exception (and his book And The Band Played On is excellent) but most other gays were against closing the bathhouses and took the Government Please Save Me stance.

    And the FDA has dragged its feet on approving every drug since 1962; their motto is No More Thalidomides.

    Yes, Reagan could have -said- more, but there was little he could have done. When was the last time a president made the bureaucracy hurry up, especially on something it did not want to do.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_the_Band_Played_On

    Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    , @Mr. Anon
    @Das

    "A legitimate criticism just sort of morphed over time into this narrative about the saintly gay community being intentionally murdered by Reagan and the Moral Majority."

    That criticism - if it was ever voiced in a half-way civil manner (and I don't remember that it ever was) - very quickly morphed into the "Reagan = AIDS" meme. The homosexuals were shameless in blaming others when they should have blamed themselves for the spread of the disease. To paraphrase Trump - somebody was doing the anonymous sodomy with fifty partners a night. And it wasn't Ronald Reagan.

    Replies: @stillCARealist

  97. @iSteveFan

    At a time when Hillary Clinton is dependent on black voters and campaigning with mothers who’ve lost sons to police violence, ...
     
    Haven't an order of magnitude more black mothers lost sons to black thugs than to the cops?

    Replies: @Diversity is Wrong, @Alec Leamas, @Clyde, @AndrewR, @Forbes, @Connecticut Famer

    You’re preaching to the choir. The people who should be listening–aren’t. And they won’t, because that Ivy-educated mandarins who control the Democrat Party have them brainwashed so they can use them as a cudgel to beat over the heads of the people the Democrat Party hates the most–middle and lower middle class white America.

  98. @Das
    @snorlax

    I agree completely. Most experts at the time were highly critical of the Reagan administration's response to AIDS. It's not some sort of crazy demand to expect quick action from the government on any sort of infectious disease outbreak. Other countries, especially in Europe, did a much better job controlling the outbreak.

    A legitimate criticism just sort of morphed over time into this narrative about the saintly gay community being intentionally murdered by Reagan and the Moral Majority.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Mr. Anon

    Good post, but …
    The gay community was vociferous in its opposition to blood testing saying it would stigmatize them. Yes, Randy Shilts was an exception (and his book And The Band Played On is excellent) but most other gays were against closing the bathhouses and took the Government Please Save Me stance.

    And the FDA has dragged its feet on approving every drug since 1962; their motto is No More Thalidomides.

    Yes, Reagan could have -said- more, but there was little he could have done. When was the last time a president made the bureaucracy hurry up, especially on something it did not want to do.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_the_Band_Played_On

    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    @Jim Don Bob

    Ok, uh, you do know that HIV infections have never reached the level of cancer, heart disease, strokes, in a given year? Which total number of deaths per year is greater, those from AIDS or those from cancer?

    AIDS has never been the US's number one killer of citizens in any given year. It hasn't been in the top three for that matter, ever.

    Perhaps if Shilts and others like him would have shown some maturity on this fact HIV would have also been more quickly contained than it was.

    Michael Fumento's landmark 1992 book The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS, by using charts, graphs, and other information based on the CDC's own projections at the time showed that the pandemic would peak and start to plateau in the US by about the year 2000. He was in fact proven to be correct and the CDC still owes him a public apology. AIDS today in the US is nowhere near as rampant as it was in the early '80's and even at its height it never surpassed deaths from cancer, stroke, or heart disease.

  99. @Anonymous
    If there weren't Michelle Goldbergs using their high IQs and verbal facility to spin these events every time they happened, even most liberals would respond to them with a natural, common sense reaction, such as, for example, agreeing with Bill's comments here. We'd have a much more rational public discourse.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @abcd

    “If there weren’t Michelle Goldbergs using their high IQs and verbal facility…”

    Inferiority complex.

  100. If the possibility of the first female President is an approaching dark cloud, its silver lining is that America would be entertained for 4 or 8 years by the antics of its first First Gentleman.

    I hope journalists will ask Hillary what the role of the First Gentleman will be. Will we once again be getting “two for the price of one”, the phrase used by Bill Clinton’s campaign to describe the anticipated contributions of Hillary to his presidency?

  101. So, in Michelle Goldberg’s view, all lives don’t matter. Basically that’s what she just wrote, although this Slate article tends to read like an Onion piece.

    Goldberg is apparently too obtuse to realize that in his own way, President Clinton was attempting to dog whistle/reach out undecideds/moderate voters a la “Don’t listen to all this crap about BLM and other far left extremism. You guys can trust her to do the right thing on law and order if things get too far out of line. Her administration won’t cause any more Fergusons to occur. After all, none occurred on my watch so you trust her to do the same on law and order.” But thankfully Ms. Goldberg won’t be having any of that. Apparently she doesn’t want any moderates or undecided white voters to vote for Hillary.

    Funny, a President Trump administration would probably spend more than 10 billion on prison construction as building new projects tend to be his kind of thing.

    And once again: ca.70% of the total white vote come November. With columnists like Goldberg writing on how all lives don’t matter, it’s only going to make it that much more of a certainty as law and order tends to be a major issue for tons of white voters.

  102. @Jim Don Bob
    @Das

    Good post, but ...
    The gay community was vociferous in its opposition to blood testing saying it would stigmatize them. Yes, Randy Shilts was an exception (and his book And The Band Played On is excellent) but most other gays were against closing the bathhouses and took the Government Please Save Me stance.

    And the FDA has dragged its feet on approving every drug since 1962; their motto is No More Thalidomides.

    Yes, Reagan could have -said- more, but there was little he could have done. When was the last time a president made the bureaucracy hurry up, especially on something it did not want to do.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_the_Band_Played_On

    Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    Ok, uh, you do know that HIV infections have never reached the level of cancer, heart disease, strokes, in a given year? Which total number of deaths per year is greater, those from AIDS or those from cancer?

    AIDS has never been the US’s number one killer of citizens in any given year. It hasn’t been in the top three for that matter, ever.

    Perhaps if Shilts and others like him would have shown some maturity on this fact HIV would have also been more quickly contained than it was.

    Michael Fumento’s landmark 1992 book The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS, by using charts, graphs, and other information based on the CDC’s own projections at the time showed that the pandemic would peak and start to plateau in the US by about the year 2000. He was in fact proven to be correct and the CDC still owes him a public apology. AIDS today in the US is nowhere near as rampant as it was in the early ’80’s and even at its height it never surpassed deaths from cancer, stroke, or heart disease.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
  103. I think Bill handled this as well as could be.

  104. @Jim Don Bob
    @Mr. Anon

    Nah, Bill is a master at turning his emotions on and off. Remember how he started tearing up at Ron Brown's funeral when he realized the cameras were on him? He'd been laughing and scratching just moments before. Very little Bill does is accidental. As others have said, Hillary doesn't need any more black primary votes (and where else are blacks gonna go in the general?), so it's time for a little Sister Soldjah.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    “Nah, Bill is a master at turning his emotions on and off. Remember how he started tearing up at Ron Brown’s funeral when he realized the cameras were on him? He’d been laughing and scratching just moments before.”

    Yes, that was noteworthy. Is there a term for such a type as that; “Sociopath”, perhaps?

    However, my favorite story about the bottomless hypocrisy and cynicism of Bill Clinton was a story I remember about his signing of the Defence of Marriage act: He tried to have it both ways – to not alienate middle America while simultaneously not alienating all those wealthy homosexual Democratic party backers. He literally denounced the bill during the signing ceremony – while he was in the act of signing it.

    A comment about Clinton that Jesse Jackson once made has always stuck with me. Jackson has made a living as a grievance monger, a mau-mauing huckster, and – essentially – an extortionist. And yet, he is not without some intelligence and observational powers, and he still seems to have a sense of decency, however atrophied. He once said of Bill Clinton: “at bottom, the man is nothing more than an appetite”.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @Mr. Anon

    In the early 90s, Jesse Jackson was running for DC's "shadow" Senator. Asked about it, Marion Barry, Mayor of DC for Life, remarked, "All Jesse wants to run is his mouth".

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

  105. @Das
    @snorlax

    I agree completely. Most experts at the time were highly critical of the Reagan administration's response to AIDS. It's not some sort of crazy demand to expect quick action from the government on any sort of infectious disease outbreak. Other countries, especially in Europe, did a much better job controlling the outbreak.

    A legitimate criticism just sort of morphed over time into this narrative about the saintly gay community being intentionally murdered by Reagan and the Moral Majority.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Mr. Anon

    “A legitimate criticism just sort of morphed over time into this narrative about the saintly gay community being intentionally murdered by Reagan and the Moral Majority.”

    That criticism – if it was ever voiced in a half-way civil manner (and I don’t remember that it ever was) – very quickly morphed into the “Reagan = AIDS” meme. The homosexuals were shameless in blaming others when they should have blamed themselves for the spread of the disease. To paraphrase Trump – somebody was doing the anonymous sodomy with fifty partners a night. And it wasn’t Ronald Reagan.

    • Replies: @stillCARealist
    @Mr. Anon

    Thank you. This topic has been done pretty thoroughly on this site before.

    Frankly, having a gay friend describe his experiences with anal sex to me, really makes me wonder what these guys were possibly thinking back in the 80's. Exchanging blood, shit, and semen with another whoring guy and you think creepy diseases won't abound? Crazy. They already knew about the existing STD's like a bunch of para-expert microbiologists and yet they think just having more gov't $$ thrown around would make AIDS stop?

    No. AIDS was just another excuse for more gov't and more marxism.

    Replies: @dumpstersquirrel

  106. @snorlax
    @AndrewR

    The "Reagan would be a RINO" stuff is nonsense.

    You and I are around the same age but I've read enough historical material from the time period for it to be obvious—he signed a bill authorizing the death penalty for drug smugglers (not sure what happened with that, probably got ruled unconstitutional), had controversies such as defending Bob Jones University's policy of not admitting black students (and AFAICT never flip-flopped on his opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act) and vetoing sanctions on South Africa, supported the gold standard and making Social Security voluntary in his 1980 campaign, etc etc.

    Replies: @stillCARealist

    such as defending Bob Jones University’s policy of not admitting black students

    What?

    Their controversy was to ban interracial dating, insofar as they allowed dating at all. That ban was rescinded in the 90’s, as if anybody really cared. Just something for the liberal outsider daisies to get their panties in a knot about.

  107. @Mr. Anon
    @Das

    "A legitimate criticism just sort of morphed over time into this narrative about the saintly gay community being intentionally murdered by Reagan and the Moral Majority."

    That criticism - if it was ever voiced in a half-way civil manner (and I don't remember that it ever was) - very quickly morphed into the "Reagan = AIDS" meme. The homosexuals were shameless in blaming others when they should have blamed themselves for the spread of the disease. To paraphrase Trump - somebody was doing the anonymous sodomy with fifty partners a night. And it wasn't Ronald Reagan.

    Replies: @stillCARealist

    Thank you. This topic has been done pretty thoroughly on this site before.

    Frankly, having a gay friend describe his experiences with anal sex to me, really makes me wonder what these guys were possibly thinking back in the 80’s. Exchanging blood, shit, and semen with another whoring guy and you think creepy diseases won’t abound? Crazy. They already knew about the existing STD’s like a bunch of para-expert microbiologists and yet they think just having more gov’t $$ thrown around would make AIDS stop?

    No. AIDS was just another excuse for more gov’t and more marxism.

    • Replies: @dumpstersquirrel
    @stillCARealist

    "Frankly, having a gay friend describe his experiences with anal sex to me, really makes me wonder what these guys were possibly thinking back in the 80′s. Exchanging blood, shit, and semen with another whoring guy and you think creepy diseases won’t abound?"

    But the Supreme Court declared all of the above an exquisitely beautiful lifestyle choice requiring mandatory celebration by all US citizens at the point of a gun. Don't you know what year it is?

    #itsnothing2celebrate

    (I want to make a bumpersticker of #itsnothing2celebrate in full rainbow glory. How would SJWs and sodomites respond to such a thing? Ha.)

  108. @anonymous
    The professional protesters are doing what they do best and that's protest. Nothing else comes from this group. They have no capability for anything except to make noise.
    Having a black president was advertised as something that was going to promote greater harmony. Yet we've gotten just the opposite, more racial strife than ever before since the 60's, much of it the handiwork of the current administration. This is all very fatiguing; I'm all 'raced-out' at this point. When it comes to this I just reach for the 'mute' button.

    Replies: @Antonymous

    “All raced-out”

    Yes, you’re not alone. In summer 2012, at the height of Trayvon Martin hand-wringing, I finally reached saturation with the obsessive cant of “race”, “unarmed black teen”, etc etc daily. I’d shut off NPR following mention of the word “race” and found myself listening fewer than ten minutes most mornings. And, like this pre-meditated slaughter in Pittsburgh, “race” was never mentioned in the context of black perpetrators and hate crimes against white people.

    The media bias tells us that white life is cheap — it’s the murderers’ race that must be protected, not even to be released in an effort to catch the criminals. If the FBI violent crime statistics showed rough parity between blacks and whites, I might understand the concerns of BLM and race advocates. But murder commission rates are some 8 times greater for blacks than for whites. The media, horrifically, sees statistical knowledge as the threat and fetes BLM advocacy while shutting down, frankly suppressing as in the case of this journalist, any anger toward black degeneracy.

    • Replies: @WJ
    @Antonymous

    Yes, many of us are "raced out". Our old AG said we were a nation of cowards because we didnt want to discuss race. Their idea of discussion is simply a berating of white people. I just can't do it anymore. I turn off from any seemingly non racial event when it becomes racial. The recent superbowl comes to mind. Somehow Cam Newtwon, being the 5th NFL blaci qb to ever start in a superbowl became an issue. Carolina became a symbol of black America. I tuned it out.

    More distressingly is Ms. Goldberg's cynical view on BLM/police shootings of blacks etc. Of course this woman knows that blacks are a far, far, far, far bigger threat to other black than are white policeman but she sees that narrative as a pathway to power for the Dems.

    Of course the low IQ Dems, Clinton and Sanders supporters, swallow that hook,line and sinker.

  109. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Actually, I think Goldberg might be right about at least a couple things.

    I think Bill might secretly want Hillary to lose.

    Remember the (in)famous phone call between Bill and Trump that likely played a role in Trump getting into the race? Some speculated that this might mean that Trump is a Clinton Manchurian candidate. But what it could mean is that Bill doesn’t want his wife to win, and felt that Trump would have a better chance of beating her than any of the Republicans that were already in the field.

    Whatever you think of Goldberg’s politics, I think she’s probably right about the impact Bill’s comments could have in the Democratic primary. This may well help Sanders. It’s interesting that Bill’s anti-BLM comments come during a period that Trump is struggling badly in general election polls, and so maybe Bill is no longer confident that Trump can beat Hillary.

    Now, why would Bill want his own wife to lose the election?

    Well, Bill Clinton has always struck me as a man who cares a great deal about his legacy.

    If Hillary is not elected, then Bill’s primary legacy is that of the 43rd President of the United States. His primary legacy is that of a US President that governed during a period of relative peace and prosperity. That’s a pretty good legacy, even if it may be lacking a major notable policy achievement.

    But if Hillary is elected, then Bill’s primary legacy becomes… being the 1st First Husband. Hillary as the first woman ever elected President would easily become much more historically notable than Bill as the 43rd male US President. So much so that Bill likely gets noted in the history books more for being the 1st First Husband than for his own Presidency.

    Now, what legacy would you rather have? Would you rather be remembered for your own peaceful prosperous Presidency, or would you rather be remembered for being the spouse of the 1st woman President?

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @Anonymous

    I would say it is very possible that Bill wants Hillary to lose because, 1.) he doesn't want to be upstaged by her, and/or 2.) he perhaps doesn't really like her very much.

  110. @Matra
    Black Lives Matter has arrived in Canada (black population 3%) big time.

    Over the last two days a prominent member of the organisation has tweeted ""Plz Allah give me strength to not cuss/kill these men and white folks out here today. Plz plz plz," and another member is now being sued:

    An outspoken member of Black Lives Matter Toronto is being sued after leaving her job with UofT’s student union with a $277,508 severance deal that included 1,975 hours of overtime.

    The union wants former executive director Sandra “Sandy” Hudson and her co-defendants — who allegedly approved the package — to jointly pay it back, along with another $200,000 in damages for breach of fiduciary duty.

    The severance payment equals approximately 10% of the union’s annual operating budget.

    In its statement of claim, the union alleges Hudson received 3.6 years of her base salary after only working there 2 1/2 years.

    Hudson, the claim says, filed for 1,975 hours of overtime on April 1, 2015. Before that date, it says, she “had never recorded any overtime hours into her personnel file.”

    Toronto Sun

    Professional protesters always know where the money is.

    BLM members will also lead Toronto's gay Pride Parade this summer.

    Replies: @Jefferson

    “BLM members will also lead Toronto’s gay Pride Parade this summer.”

    A member of Black Lies Matter named Deray McKesson is a fag who is running for mayor of Baltimore. BLM here in The U.S was originally started by 3 dykes.

    There is seems to be a disproportionate number of Homosexuals in the Black Lies Matter movement. I wonder why that is?

    • Replies: @dumpstersquirrel
    @Jefferson

    "There is seems to be a disproportionate number of [heterophobes] in the Black Lies Matter movement. I wonder why that is?"

    Because double the hate: they hate Whites PLUS they hate people with normal sexuality. So they're doubly motivated to take that 12.75 an hour from Organizing Against (White) America and go astroturfing for the Democratic Party.

  111. @no name
    @Bill Jones

    By that logic the last 8 years aren't Obama's fault.

    Replies: @Brutusale

    Bubba BJ was able to ride the tech bubble almost to the end of his term, and was smart enough not to do much to screw it up.

    The Lightbringer isn’t that smart.

  112. …right-wing tendency to derail conversations …

    To derail means to halt; to bring to a stop. Never realized before that conversations must mean left-wing one-track minds.

  113. @Mr. Anon
    @Jim Don Bob

    "Nah, Bill is a master at turning his emotions on and off. Remember how he started tearing up at Ron Brown’s funeral when he realized the cameras were on him? He’d been laughing and scratching just moments before."

    Yes, that was noteworthy. Is there a term for such a type as that; "Sociopath", perhaps?

    However, my favorite story about the bottomless hypocrisy and cynicism of Bill Clinton was a story I remember about his signing of the Defence of Marriage act: He tried to have it both ways - to not alienate middle America while simultaneously not alienating all those wealthy homosexual Democratic party backers. He literally denounced the bill during the signing ceremony - while he was in the act of signing it.

    A comment about Clinton that Jesse Jackson once made has always stuck with me. Jackson has made a living as a grievance monger, a mau-mauing huckster, and - essentially - an extortionist. And yet, he is not without some intelligence and observational powers, and he still seems to have a sense of decency, however atrophied. He once said of Bill Clinton: "at bottom, the man is nothing more than an appetite".

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

    In the early 90s, Jesse Jackson was running for DC’s “shadow” Senator. Asked about it, Marion Barry, Mayor of DC for Life, remarked, “All Jesse wants to run is his mouth”.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @Jim Don Bob

    That doesn't change the fact that Jesse has occasionally had interesting and even truthful things to say.

  114. @stillCARealist
    @Mr. Anon

    Thank you. This topic has been done pretty thoroughly on this site before.

    Frankly, having a gay friend describe his experiences with anal sex to me, really makes me wonder what these guys were possibly thinking back in the 80's. Exchanging blood, shit, and semen with another whoring guy and you think creepy diseases won't abound? Crazy. They already knew about the existing STD's like a bunch of para-expert microbiologists and yet they think just having more gov't $$ thrown around would make AIDS stop?

    No. AIDS was just another excuse for more gov't and more marxism.

    Replies: @dumpstersquirrel

    “Frankly, having a gay friend describe his experiences with anal sex to me, really makes me wonder what these guys were possibly thinking back in the 80′s. Exchanging blood, shit, and semen with another whoring guy and you think creepy diseases won’t abound?”

    But the Supreme Court declared all of the above an exquisitely beautiful lifestyle choice requiring mandatory celebration by all US citizens at the point of a gun. Don’t you know what year it is?

    #itsnothing2celebrate

    (I want to make a bumpersticker of #itsnothing2celebrate in full rainbow glory. How would SJWs and sodomites respond to such a thing? Ha.)

  115. @Jefferson
    @Matra

    "BLM members will also lead Toronto’s gay Pride Parade this summer."

    A member of Black Lies Matter named Deray McKesson is a fag who is running for mayor of Baltimore. BLM here in The U.S was originally started by 3 dykes.

    There is seems to be a disproportionate number of Homosexuals in the Black Lies Matter movement. I wonder why that is?

    Replies: @dumpstersquirrel

    “There is seems to be a disproportionate number of [heterophobes] in the Black Lies Matter movement. I wonder why that is?”

    Because double the hate: they hate Whites PLUS they hate people with normal sexuality. So they’re doubly motivated to take that 12.75 an hour from Organizing Against (White) America and go astroturfing for the Democratic Party.

  116. @Das
    @AndrewR

    A few people who weren't around at the time call Reagan a "RINO" because after completely obliterating the Democrats and getting his priorities through, he was able to come to the table and make compromises on other issues.

    When he entered office, the top rate of income tax was 70% and when he left it was 26%. The percentage of the workforce who were union members went from 25% to 15%.

    He was the first president in decades who just flat out refused to meet with the NAACP and other civil rights groups.

    He was closely tied to the religious right in a way that not even GWB could match. When he finally did give his speech on AIDS in 1987, he wasn't giving the usual politically correct bromides. He blamed the epidemic on gays and drug addicts and told young people to stay abstinent.

    That is to say, for people in the conservative movement at the time, Reagan was an utter dream come true. At the time he was so much more right-wing than any president in living memory, there were no serious complaints.

    Replies: @Not sure

    And yet, just one of those compromises may well have destroyed America .

  117. @Jim Don Bob
    @Mr. Anon

    In the early 90s, Jesse Jackson was running for DC's "shadow" Senator. Asked about it, Marion Barry, Mayor of DC for Life, remarked, "All Jesse wants to run is his mouth".

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    That doesn’t change the fact that Jesse has occasionally had interesting and even truthful things to say.

  118. @Anonymous
    Actually, I think Goldberg might be right about at least a couple things.

    I think Bill might secretly want Hillary to lose.

    Remember the (in)famous phone call between Bill and Trump that likely played a role in Trump getting into the race? Some speculated that this might mean that Trump is a Clinton Manchurian candidate. But what it could mean is that Bill doesn't want his wife to win, and felt that Trump would have a better chance of beating her than any of the Republicans that were already in the field.

    Whatever you think of Goldberg's politics, I think she's probably right about the impact Bill's comments could have in the Democratic primary. This may well help Sanders. It's interesting that Bill's anti-BLM comments come during a period that Trump is struggling badly in general election polls, and so maybe Bill is no longer confident that Trump can beat Hillary.


    Now, why would Bill want his own wife to lose the election?

    Well, Bill Clinton has always struck me as a man who cares a great deal about his legacy.

    If Hillary is not elected, then Bill's primary legacy is that of the 43rd President of the United States. His primary legacy is that of a US President that governed during a period of relative peace and prosperity. That's a pretty good legacy, even if it may be lacking a major notable policy achievement.

    But if Hillary is elected, then Bill's primary legacy becomes... being the 1st First Husband. Hillary as the first woman ever elected President would easily become much more historically notable than Bill as the 43rd male US President. So much so that Bill likely gets noted in the history books more for being the 1st First Husband than for his own Presidency.

    Now, what legacy would you rather have? Would you rather be remembered for your own peaceful prosperous Presidency, or would you rather be remembered for being the spouse of the 1st woman President?

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    I would say it is very possible that Bill wants Hillary to lose because, 1.) he doesn’t want to be upstaged by her, and/or 2.) he perhaps doesn’t really like her very much.

  119. @Antonymous
    @anonymous

    "All raced-out"

    Yes, you're not alone. In summer 2012, at the height of Trayvon Martin hand-wringing, I finally reached saturation with the obsessive cant of "race", "unarmed black teen", etc etc daily. I'd shut off NPR following mention of the word "race" and found myself listening fewer than ten minutes most mornings. And, like this pre-meditated slaughter in Pittsburgh, "race" was never mentioned in the context of black perpetrators and hate crimes against white people.

    The media bias tells us that white life is cheap -- it's the murderers' race that must be protected, not even to be released in an effort to catch the criminals. If the FBI violent crime statistics showed rough parity between blacks and whites, I might understand the concerns of BLM and race advocates. But murder commission rates are some 8 times greater for blacks than for whites. The media, horrifically, sees statistical knowledge as the threat and fetes BLM advocacy while shutting down, frankly suppressing as in the case of this journalist, any anger toward black degeneracy.

    Replies: @WJ

    Yes, many of us are “raced out”. Our old AG said we were a nation of cowards because we didnt want to discuss race. Their idea of discussion is simply a berating of white people. I just can’t do it anymore. I turn off from any seemingly non racial event when it becomes racial. The recent superbowl comes to mind. Somehow Cam Newtwon, being the 5th NFL blaci qb to ever start in a superbowl became an issue. Carolina became a symbol of black America. I tuned it out.

    More distressingly is Ms. Goldberg’s cynical view on BLM/police shootings of blacks etc. Of course this woman knows that blacks are a far, far, far, far bigger threat to other black than are white policeman but she sees that narrative as a pathway to power for the Dems.

    Of course the low IQ Dems, Clinton and Sanders supporters, swallow that hook,line and sinker.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS