The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Forward: "Who the Jewish Billionaires Are Backing for 2016"
🔊 Listen RSS
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

The Jewish Daily Forward reports:

Who the Jewish Billionaires Are Backing for 2016

Nathan Guttman May 21, 2015

A quick look at the list of top political donors for 2014 reveals a striking fact: At least a third of the most generous 50 mega-givers were Jewish. In fact, contributions from Jewish billionaires and multi-millionaires dominated the top 10 spots on the list.

Screen Shot 2015-05-21 at 9.34.53 PM

Striking, yet unsurprising.

Political activists have known for years that members of the Jewish community are over-represented in the field of political contributions.

And now, with the 2016 election cycle beginning to warm up, these Jewish donors are on the minds of all prospective candidates.

The 2014 list represents donors who were active between presidential election cycles. Some gave directly to parties, or candidates, but most of the money went to Super PACs, the main cash vehicle that will oil the wheels of the 2016 presidential campaign.

On the Democratic side, donors are taking a more relaxed approach. With Hillary Rodham Clinton dominating the field, most donors are saving their cash gifts for the actual presidential race.

Clinton comes with her own rolodex of major Jewish donors, many of whom funded her 2000 Senate race and her unsuccessful 2008 presidential bid. Haim Saban, the Hollywood cartoon billionaire, is their poster child — a devoted backer who has given millions throughout the years and has become part of the Clintons’ inner circle. Saban is not featured on the top 2014 donor list, but all Democratic activists contacted by the Forward mention his name on the top of their 2016 list.

I like the phrase “cartoon billionaire.”

 
Hide 67 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Haim Saban gave the world The Mighty Morphin Power Rangers.

  2. Matthew Weiner wouldn’t be pleased to see that Charles Koch has somehow become a member of the Tribe.

    • Replies: @tbraton
    James Walker, I believe you made the same mistake I initially made in reading the list. You assumed that the list was of "Jewish billionaires," whereas it is a list of billionaires making substantial political contributions. Whereas you reacted to the Koch brothers inclusion on the list, my first reaction was to the first name on the list, Tom Steyer. I thought to myself "I didn't realize Steyer was Jewish." (Not that I had given the matter any thought.) It was seeing the Kochs listed that made me realize that the list was not of Jewish billionaires but of billionaires generally. (Out of curiosity I discovered that Tom Steyer is half Jewish, for what it is worth (his father was Jewish, his mother Episcopalian.) Any objection I have to Steyer is not based on his religion but to his position on global warming.)
  3. Oligarchy at its finest.

    • Replies: @Ed
    More like a cabal.
  4. Lot says:

    This list is not accurate measure of “top political donors.” Disclosure is no longer required of political donations, but every year that it was, the Koch Brothers were on top, with Sheldon Adelson a distant second. They dropped about $100 million just on Karl Rove’s superpacs in 2012 for Romney and GOP senate candidates.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    See:

    https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php
  5. How long has the U.S. political system been underwritten by Rich Uncle Pennyberg?

    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    Since the days of John Hancock
  6. Reading the Jewish Daily Forward, Tablet Magazine and other jewish and israeli newspapers is a eye opener.

    You want real information? Read the jewish community newspapers.

    • Replies: @Karl
    >> You want real information? Read the jewish community newspapers

    nah, most of the ink they spill is stolen (as in not licensed, and not credited) from the Hebrew press.
    , @Anonymous
    Jewish power isn't a conspiracy, it's a fact.
    , @RJA
    Just had a wistful feeling remembering my grandfather, sitting in his large armchair reading Forward -- first in Yiddish, then Russian, then English (which he only learned in his late 50s). I once asked him why he reads the same magazine in three different languages and he said they're not at all the same.

    The Russian version was way more conservative. This jives well with my observation that Russian Jews are on average significantly more conservative than American Jews, either because of pre-1917 sorting via immigration or as a reaction to actually living under Soviet rule.
  7. Apparently the top issues for Jewish billionaires, whether Republican or Democrat, are supporting Israel, opposing financial regulation and supporting gay rights. None of these are key issues for 90% of the American population. How “gay rights” became such a core issue is an amazing question. For most of history men have actually been fairly free to have sex with other men as long as they were discreet about it, even in “repressive” societies like Victorian England or Eisenhower’s America. Even the Nazis used homosexuality mostly as an excuse to punish or embarass political enemies, they weren’t rounding up the gays for mass deportation to the camps, despite what people today seem to believe. Isn’t it odd how leftists, who supposedly support the downtrodden, find it easier to support an “oppressed” group that consists of generally intelligent, well educated, affluent people with good work habits rather than spending energy on truly disfunctional despised groups like inner city blacks, gypsies, or native Americans? Or maybe it is not very surprising at all.

    • Replies: @anonymous

    Isn’t it odd how leftists, who supposedly support the downtrodden,
     
    Not a hint of class struggle on the part of these supposed 'leftists' who have gone off into cultural struggle. The government probably preempted actual leftism by supporting this rival brand so as to draw attention off elsewhere. This way those who might have been considered class oppressors in the past can now style themselves as popular heroes by pushing identity politics which doesn't threaten their bank accounts or their hold on the political system.
    , @Ozymandias
    "How “gay rights” became such a core issue is an amazing question."

    Truly it is. The prohibition against homosexuality most oft cited is in Leviticus (i. e. the "Jewish" part of the Bible). Yet educated Christians will argue that the old covenant has been fulfilled and replaced, via Matthew 5:17:

    17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
    18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

    Jews are bound by covenant to consider homosexuality an "abomination," yet they champion it; Christians are released from this covenant but remain its staunchest opponents.

    It's a mixed up, muddled up, shook up world.
    , @Wally
    Amazing how a controlled media gets away with so much disinformation. A quick Google search reveals this about the Nazis & gays

    see:
    THE MYTH OF A NAZI EXTERMINATION OF HOMOSEXUALS
    http://www.cwporter.com/homo.htm
    , @Harry Baldwin
    Apparently the top issues for Jewish billionaires, whether Republican or Democrat, are supporting Israel, opposing financial regulation and supporting gay rights.

    And open borders, of course.
    , @Eustace Tilley (not)


    "Isn't it odd how leftists...find it easier to support an 'oppressed' group that consists of generally intelligent, well educated, affluent people with good work habits rather than spending energy on truly disfunctional [sic] despised groups like inner city blacks, gypsies, or native Americans?"

    The leftists have spent over a trillion dollars on inner city blacks since LBJ's "Great Society" programs started in the early '60's. But there is a saying in our English language: "You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear." Give an inner-city black $40,000 or so of taxpayer's money for his freshman year at Harvard (his academic qualifications not being an issue), and he will probably buy a brand new "ride" (Cadillacs are a bit out of fashion; BMW's would be more likely to his taste) and spend the rest on dope, Hennessy cognac, Newport filter cigarettes, and "ho's". After all that, he probably wouldn't even bother to vote Democratic.

    The problem with the Roma in Europe is maybe even worse.

    When the left helps the homosexuals, at least it gets a lot of political support back from the media and the general culture.
  8. @JohnnyWalker123
    Oligarchy at its finest.

    More like a cabal.

  9. Does anyone know which issues the non-Jewish billionaires are supporting? Be interesting to compare and contrast.

  10. Now I see why the Koch brothers are the nation’s number one villains for trying to buy American politics.

  11. Jews bet on all horses.

  12. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Peter Akuleyev
    Apparently the top issues for Jewish billionaires, whether Republican or Democrat, are supporting Israel, opposing financial regulation and supporting gay rights. None of these are key issues for 90% of the American population. How "gay rights" became such a core issue is an amazing question. For most of history men have actually been fairly free to have sex with other men as long as they were discreet about it, even in "repressive" societies like Victorian England or Eisenhower's America. Even the Nazis used homosexuality mostly as an excuse to punish or embarass political enemies, they weren't rounding up the gays for mass deportation to the camps, despite what people today seem to believe. Isn't it odd how leftists, who supposedly support the downtrodden, find it easier to support an "oppressed" group that consists of generally intelligent, well educated, affluent people with good work habits rather than spending energy on truly disfunctional despised groups like inner city blacks, gypsies, or native Americans? Or maybe it is not very surprising at all.

    Isn’t it odd how leftists, who supposedly support the downtrodden,

    Not a hint of class struggle on the part of these supposed ‘leftists’ who have gone off into cultural struggle. The government probably preempted actual leftism by supporting this rival brand so as to draw attention off elsewhere. This way those who might have been considered class oppressors in the past can now style themselves as popular heroes by pushing identity politics which doesn’t threaten their bank accounts or their hold on the political system.

  13. @Lot
    This list is not accurate measure of "top political donors." Disclosure is no longer required of political donations, but every year that it was, the Koch Brothers were on top, with Sheldon Adelson a distant second. They dropped about $100 million just on Karl Rove's superpacs in 2012 for Romney and GOP senate candidates.
  14. @Peter Akuleyev
    Apparently the top issues for Jewish billionaires, whether Republican or Democrat, are supporting Israel, opposing financial regulation and supporting gay rights. None of these are key issues for 90% of the American population. How "gay rights" became such a core issue is an amazing question. For most of history men have actually been fairly free to have sex with other men as long as they were discreet about it, even in "repressive" societies like Victorian England or Eisenhower's America. Even the Nazis used homosexuality mostly as an excuse to punish or embarass political enemies, they weren't rounding up the gays for mass deportation to the camps, despite what people today seem to believe. Isn't it odd how leftists, who supposedly support the downtrodden, find it easier to support an "oppressed" group that consists of generally intelligent, well educated, affluent people with good work habits rather than spending energy on truly disfunctional despised groups like inner city blacks, gypsies, or native Americans? Or maybe it is not very surprising at all.

    “How “gay rights” became such a core issue is an amazing question.”

    Truly it is. The prohibition against homosexuality most oft cited is in Leviticus (i. e. the “Jewish” part of the Bible). Yet educated Christians will argue that the old covenant has been fulfilled and replaced, via Matthew 5:17:

    17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
    18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

    Jews are bound by covenant to consider homosexuality an “abomination,” yet they champion it; Christians are released from this covenant but remain its staunchest opponents.

    It’s a mixed up, muddled up, shook up world.

    • Replies: @Desiderius

    Christians are released from this covenant
     
    Try reading the rest of the chapter.
    , @SFG
    Most Jewish billionaires aren't that religious; it's primarily an ethnic identity, like Italian or Irish, to them. The Orthodox don't like gays.

    I appreciate the Lola reference.
  15. @Peter Akuleyev
    Apparently the top issues for Jewish billionaires, whether Republican or Democrat, are supporting Israel, opposing financial regulation and supporting gay rights. None of these are key issues for 90% of the American population. How "gay rights" became such a core issue is an amazing question. For most of history men have actually been fairly free to have sex with other men as long as they were discreet about it, even in "repressive" societies like Victorian England or Eisenhower's America. Even the Nazis used homosexuality mostly as an excuse to punish or embarass political enemies, they weren't rounding up the gays for mass deportation to the camps, despite what people today seem to believe. Isn't it odd how leftists, who supposedly support the downtrodden, find it easier to support an "oppressed" group that consists of generally intelligent, well educated, affluent people with good work habits rather than spending energy on truly disfunctional despised groups like inner city blacks, gypsies, or native Americans? Or maybe it is not very surprising at all.

    Amazing how a controlled media gets away with so much disinformation. A quick Google search reveals this about the Nazis & gays

    see:
    THE MYTH OF A NAZI EXTERMINATION OF HOMOSEXUALS
    http://www.cwporter.com/homo.htm

  16. @Chiron
    Reading the Jewish Daily Forward, Tablet Magazine and other jewish and israeli newspapers is a eye opener.

    You want real information? Read the jewish community newspapers.

    >> You want real information? Read the jewish community newspapers

    nah, most of the ink they spill is stolen (as in not licensed, and not credited) from the Hebrew press.

  17. Inquiring minds want to know: will the next president, whoever they may be, try to drag us into a major war with Iran? Are the ‘donor class’ lining up to see that this becomes a reality?

  18. Paul Singer is a cartoonishly evil billionaire. His fortune has come in part from debt collection and extorting impoverished third world countries. His big issues are support for Israel, open borders immigration and gay rights. It’s funny to see what happens on heavily censored conservative discussion forums like FreeRepublic and NRO when Singer’s immigration and gay marriage machinations come up in mainstream media articles, which always mention his “strong support for Israel.” He gets criticized, but it’s very uncomfortable. These Evangelical Bubba types will throw in “at least he’s good on Israel though,” as if this was somehow benefiting them.

  19. @Peter Akuleyev
    Apparently the top issues for Jewish billionaires, whether Republican or Democrat, are supporting Israel, opposing financial regulation and supporting gay rights. None of these are key issues for 90% of the American population. How "gay rights" became such a core issue is an amazing question. For most of history men have actually been fairly free to have sex with other men as long as they were discreet about it, even in "repressive" societies like Victorian England or Eisenhower's America. Even the Nazis used homosexuality mostly as an excuse to punish or embarass political enemies, they weren't rounding up the gays for mass deportation to the camps, despite what people today seem to believe. Isn't it odd how leftists, who supposedly support the downtrodden, find it easier to support an "oppressed" group that consists of generally intelligent, well educated, affluent people with good work habits rather than spending energy on truly disfunctional despised groups like inner city blacks, gypsies, or native Americans? Or maybe it is not very surprising at all.

    Apparently the top issues for Jewish billionaires, whether Republican or Democrat, are supporting Israel, opposing financial regulation and supporting gay rights.

    And open borders, of course.

    • Replies: @Wally
    Open borders for all except apartheid 'Israel', that is.
    , @Peter Akuleyev
    None of the billionaires in that article list open borders as an issue. Probably for the obvious reason that as far as elites are concerned "open borders" is no longer an issue, it is simply a fait accompli. For three of the six the Forward claims that "Gay rights" is an "Issue of Interest", and 2 of them (Geffen and Eychanar) list only Gay Rights and AIDs Research as "Issues of Interest". I know homosexuals tend towards narcissism, but that is ridiculous.
  20. Eustace Tilley (not) [AKA "Schiller/Nietzsche"] says:
    @Peter Akuleyev
    Apparently the top issues for Jewish billionaires, whether Republican or Democrat, are supporting Israel, opposing financial regulation and supporting gay rights. None of these are key issues for 90% of the American population. How "gay rights" became such a core issue is an amazing question. For most of history men have actually been fairly free to have sex with other men as long as they were discreet about it, even in "repressive" societies like Victorian England or Eisenhower's America. Even the Nazis used homosexuality mostly as an excuse to punish or embarass political enemies, they weren't rounding up the gays for mass deportation to the camps, despite what people today seem to believe. Isn't it odd how leftists, who supposedly support the downtrodden, find it easier to support an "oppressed" group that consists of generally intelligent, well educated, affluent people with good work habits rather than spending energy on truly disfunctional despised groups like inner city blacks, gypsies, or native Americans? Or maybe it is not very surprising at all.

    “Isn’t it odd how leftists…find it easier to support an ‘oppressed’ group that consists of generally intelligent, well educated, affluent people with good work habits rather than spending energy on truly disfunctional [sic] despised groups like inner city blacks, gypsies, or native Americans?”

    The leftists have spent over a trillion dollars on inner city blacks since LBJ’s “Great Society” programs started in the early ’60’s. But there is a saying in our English language: “You can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.” Give an inner-city black $40,000 or so of taxpayer’s money for his freshman year at Harvard (his academic qualifications not being an issue), and he will probably buy a brand new “ride” (Cadillacs are a bit out of fashion; BMW’s would be more likely to his taste) and spend the rest on dope, Hennessy cognac, Newport filter cigarettes, and “ho’s”. After all that, he probably wouldn’t even bother to vote Democratic.

    The problem with the Roma in Europe is maybe even worse.

    When the left helps the homosexuals, at least it gets a lot of political support back from the media and the general culture.

  21. Does Fred Eychaner belong here?

    “Raised in DeKalb by Republican parents who stressed Methodist traditions and social responsibility, Eychaner is the oldest of four children. As a teenager, he worked for his family’s moving company, flattening packing paper for reuse”

    . – See more at: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2005-06-07/news/0506070274_1_gay-rights-activist-politics-fred-eychaner#sthash.Haz4JWbW.dpuf

  22. Wally [AKA "BobbyBeGood"] says: • Website
    @Harry Baldwin
    Apparently the top issues for Jewish billionaires, whether Republican or Democrat, are supporting Israel, opposing financial regulation and supporting gay rights.

    And open borders, of course.

    Open borders for all except apartheid ‘Israel’, that is.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar


    Open borders for all except apartheid ‘Israel’, that is.

     

    You say "apartheid" like it's a bad word.
  23. Where did the other $ 17.5 million of Michael Bloombergs contributions go? He’s listed as contibuting $ 28.5 million in total, $10.5 million to “dems and liberals”, and only $ 0.5 million to “republicans and conservatives”.

    By the way, I don’t imagine that Bloomberg would donate a dime to any real conservative, nor would anyone else on that list. The heading “republicans and conservatives” should really be changed to just “republicans”.

  24. R U sure the Koch family is Jewish? Wikipedia says they are of Dutch gentile extraction.

  25. @Chiron
    Reading the Jewish Daily Forward, Tablet Magazine and other jewish and israeli newspapers is a eye opener.

    You want real information? Read the jewish community newspapers.

    Jewish power isn’t a conspiracy, it’s a fact.

  26. Joe Ricketts is Roman Catholic. He graduated from Jesuit Creighton University, which is noted among other things for its graduate program in conflict mediation. He’s building a Jesuit-oriented retreat center in Nebraska. That’s what non-Jews do that is different from Jews: Saban bought Brookings Institute at the time when it was the most respected ‘think tank’ in DC. (It is that no longer.)

    http://journalstar.com/news/local/billionaire-joe-ricketts-plans-religious-retreat-near-mahoney-state-park/article_d45d53dc-559a-5cab-8aa7-4a5531cea44b.html

    Reasonable to think that his support for Republicans is based on preferences broader than Israel.

  27. Very interesting.

    Is there any significant variance from the donation habits of goyische billionaires?

  28. @Buzz Mohawk
    Why even bother to vote?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Uncle_Pennybags

    Why? Indeed.

  29. The Koch bros. are not Jewish.

  30. RJA says:
    @Chiron
    Reading the Jewish Daily Forward, Tablet Magazine and other jewish and israeli newspapers is a eye opener.

    You want real information? Read the jewish community newspapers.

    Just had a wistful feeling remembering my grandfather, sitting in his large armchair reading Forward — first in Yiddish, then Russian, then English (which he only learned in his late 50s). I once asked him why he reads the same magazine in three different languages and he said they’re not at all the same.

    The Russian version was way more conservative. This jives well with my observation that Russian Jews are on average significantly more conservative than American Jews, either because of pre-1917 sorting via immigration or as a reaction to actually living under Soviet rule.

  31. @Harry Baldwin
    Apparently the top issues for Jewish billionaires, whether Republican or Democrat, are supporting Israel, opposing financial regulation and supporting gay rights.

    And open borders, of course.

    None of the billionaires in that article list open borders as an issue. Probably for the obvious reason that as far as elites are concerned “open borders” is no longer an issue, it is simply a fait accompli. For three of the six the Forward claims that “Gay rights” is an “Issue of Interest”, and 2 of them (Geffen and Eychanar) list only Gay Rights and AIDs Research as “Issues of Interest”. I know homosexuals tend towards narcissism, but that is ridiculous.

    • Replies: @advancedatheist

    I know homosexuals tend towards narcissism, but that is ridiculous.
     
    Do gay male public figures ever show signs of - what do you call it? - personal growth? emotional maturity? even "enlightenment"?

    In other words, do they ever reach a point of disgust with doing what a lot of gay men travel around the world doing, and then they admit that they no longer find it as fulfilling as they expected, and that perhaps gay men should structure their lives around healthier and more sustainable projects and goals?

    I've wondered about this lately because Roosh, the straight PUA/sex tourist who blogs about his sexual adventures and observations about life, has started to sound like he has reached diminishing returns after becoming so successful with picking up women - or at least so he claims - and he seems at a loss for what to do with the rest of his life.
  32. anybody have and data on if/how accurate this predicts the electoral outcome? i wonder if simons runs this sort of data through his computers at hedge fund hq? will his algos pick the next imperial overlord?

  33. FWIW I think it would be great if the 60-70% of our billionaires who are not Jewish would get off their butts and start supporting better Republican candidates than the ones we’re getting. So what’s stopping them?

    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    There's one Peter Thiel, and that's about it. And he's got problems.

    The Billionaire class has worldviews that are quite hard to square with Midwestern blue collar workers.

    Even Putin struggles to control his oligarchs.
    , @Jefferson
    "FWIW I think it would be great if the 60-70% of our billionaires who are not Jewish would get off their butts and start supporting better Republican candidates than the ones we’re getting. So what’s stopping them?"

    Most billionaires in the U.S in general are Democrats, even the WASP Goy billionaires like George Lucas, Bill Gates, and Warren Buffet for example. And the few who are Republicans, most of them are going to get behind the open borders pro-amnesty beta male RINO Jeb Bush.
    , @JohnnyWalker123
    Good point.

    I think a lack of "asabiya" (social solidarity) is the issue here. Billionaire gentile Americans no longer feel kinship with regular Americans. Meanwhile, Jewish billionaires seem to have extreme (and increasing) levels of asabiya. That results in America doing nothing about free trade and immigration, but going insane over Israel's national security.
  34. Don’t believe Dick Uihlein is Jewish.

  35. advancedatheist [AKA "RedneckCryonicist"] says:
    @Peter Akuleyev
    None of the billionaires in that article list open borders as an issue. Probably for the obvious reason that as far as elites are concerned "open borders" is no longer an issue, it is simply a fait accompli. For three of the six the Forward claims that "Gay rights" is an "Issue of Interest", and 2 of them (Geffen and Eychanar) list only Gay Rights and AIDs Research as "Issues of Interest". I know homosexuals tend towards narcissism, but that is ridiculous.

    I know homosexuals tend towards narcissism, but that is ridiculous.

    Do gay male public figures ever show signs of – what do you call it? – personal growth? emotional maturity? even “enlightenment”?

    In other words, do they ever reach a point of disgust with doing what a lot of gay men travel around the world doing, and then they admit that they no longer find it as fulfilling as they expected, and that perhaps gay men should structure their lives around healthier and more sustainable projects and goals?

    I’ve wondered about this lately because Roosh, the straight PUA/sex tourist who blogs about his sexual adventures and observations about life, has started to sound like he has reached diminishing returns after becoming so successful with picking up women – or at least so he claims – and he seems at a loss for what to do with the rest of his life.

    • Replies: @JohnnyWalker123
    Almost all "sex tourists" involve themselves with prostitution. When I was reading through his forums a couple times, I noticed that most of the men there seemed to be chasing hookers. They didn't seem happy though, they seemed unsatisfied with life. Some of them admitted to being alcoholics or even suicidal.

    I assume that, after a while, that type of lifestyle makes one depressed. Prostitution is psychologically often as exploitative for men as it for women.

  36. Whites are more niggardly than the Jews.

    Reminds me of the story about the man, freezing by the woodstove, shaking a log at the oven and shouting “If you give me warmth, I’ll give you wood!” No, you have to give to get.

    • Replies: @Romanian
    I can't believe you chose the N-word by accident. You are micro-aggressing people of color even here. And I don't need to spell out how some people could find your choice of words insensitive and objectionable.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_about_the_word_%22niggardly%22
  37. @AshTon
    How long has the U.S. political system been underwritten by Rich Uncle Pennyberg?

    Since the days of John Hancock

  38. @International Jew
    FWIW I think it would be great if the 60-70% of our billionaires who are not Jewish would get off their butts and start supporting better Republican candidates than the ones we're getting. So what's stopping them?

    There’s one Peter Thiel, and that’s about it. And he’s got problems.

    The Billionaire class has worldviews that are quite hard to square with Midwestern blue collar workers.

    Even Putin struggles to control his oligarchs.

    • Replies: @Desiderius

    The Billionaire class has worldviews that are quite hard to square with Midwestern blue collar workers.
     
    The former are citizens of the world, the latter citizens of America. They are members of two different polities joined at the hip by a single election. Over time, the professors and editors those billionaires have hired have effectively eroded the importance of the representatives those elections choose in lieu of the power of unelected bureaucracies and judges.
  39. @Ozymandias
    "How “gay rights” became such a core issue is an amazing question."

    Truly it is. The prohibition against homosexuality most oft cited is in Leviticus (i. e. the "Jewish" part of the Bible). Yet educated Christians will argue that the old covenant has been fulfilled and replaced, via Matthew 5:17:

    17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
    18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

    Jews are bound by covenant to consider homosexuality an "abomination," yet they champion it; Christians are released from this covenant but remain its staunchest opponents.

    It's a mixed up, muddled up, shook up world.

    Christians are released from this covenant

    Try reading the rest of the chapter.

    • Replies: @Ozymandias
    I've read it, many times. This was not my argument to begin with, it is the argument invariably presented to me when you ask a biblical scholar why they don't stone people for working on Sunday, or any of the other laws which they no longer choose to uphold. But it is a pick and choose religion, the parts you agree with you can cite the Bible as God's word backing your opinion, the parts you don't agree with can just be ignored.
  40. @Maj. Kong
    There's one Peter Thiel, and that's about it. And he's got problems.

    The Billionaire class has worldviews that are quite hard to square with Midwestern blue collar workers.

    Even Putin struggles to control his oligarchs.

    The Billionaire class has worldviews that are quite hard to square with Midwestern blue collar workers.

    The former are citizens of the world, the latter citizens of America. They are members of two different polities joined at the hip by a single election. Over time, the professors and editors those billionaires have hired have effectively eroded the importance of the representatives those elections choose in lieu of the power of unelected bureaucracies and judges.

  41. @Yngvar
    Whites are more niggardly than the Jews.

    Reminds me of the story about the man, freezing by the woodstove, shaking a log at the oven and shouting "If you give me warmth, I'll give you wood!" No, you have to give to get.

    I can’t believe you chose the N-word by accident. You are micro-aggressing people of color even here. And I don’t need to spell out how some people could find your choice of words insensitive and objectionable.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_about_the_word_%22niggardly%22

  42. @Desiderius

    Christians are released from this covenant
     
    Try reading the rest of the chapter.

    I’ve read it, many times. This was not my argument to begin with, it is the argument invariably presented to me when you ask a biblical scholar why they don’t stone people for working on Sunday, or any of the other laws which they no longer choose to uphold. But it is a pick and choose religion, the parts you agree with you can cite the Bible as God’s word backing your opinion, the parts you don’t agree with can just be ignored.

    • Replies: @Desiderius

    But it is a pick and choose religion, the parts you agree with you can cite the Bible as God’s word backing your opinion, the parts you don’t agree with can just be ignored.
     
    You are gravely mistaken.
  43. Is there any info on how many gays are actually liberal, as opposed to how many liberals are pro-gay? Voting for the Left’s open-borders programme is insane from gays’ point of view. White Western countries are the only places where the present level of homosexual activity would be tolerated, and there is no prospect of this state of affairs being replicated in any non-white society. If they think Europeans are homophobic, just wait till the Muslims take over.

    • Replies: @Noah172
    Exit polls for the last four presidential elections have shown, if memory serves, about a 3-to-1 Dem/Rep split for the homosexual vote. Don't know about outside the US but it is probably less stark, insofar as center-right parties in most other advanced countries are less conservative on cultural issues compared to the GOP (e.g., it was Tory Cameron who delivered homosexual marriage to Britain), thus leaving homosexual voters free to vote on other matters.
  44. @Ozymandias
    "How “gay rights” became such a core issue is an amazing question."

    Truly it is. The prohibition against homosexuality most oft cited is in Leviticus (i. e. the "Jewish" part of the Bible). Yet educated Christians will argue that the old covenant has been fulfilled and replaced, via Matthew 5:17:

    17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
    18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

    Jews are bound by covenant to consider homosexuality an "abomination," yet they champion it; Christians are released from this covenant but remain its staunchest opponents.

    It's a mixed up, muddled up, shook up world.

    Most Jewish billionaires aren’t that religious; it’s primarily an ethnic identity, like Italian or Irish, to them. The Orthodox don’t like gays.

    I appreciate the Lola reference.

  45. What is the greatest advantage of these Jewish billionaires who put their money where their mouth is? They are among the few highly intelligent Americans who speak their minds in public. Non-billionaires with strong opinions are driven to online anonymity:
    http://worldcrass.com/2015/05/22/opinionated-americans-like-me-saudis-are-driven-to-an-anonymous-intellectual-life-on-twitter-nytimes-is-more-concerned-with-the-plight-of-saudis/

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    Non-billionaires with strong opinions are driven to online anonymity.
     
    You don't say.
  46. @International Jew
    FWIW I think it would be great if the 60-70% of our billionaires who are not Jewish would get off their butts and start supporting better Republican candidates than the ones we're getting. So what's stopping them?

    “FWIW I think it would be great if the 60-70% of our billionaires who are not Jewish would get off their butts and start supporting better Republican candidates than the ones we’re getting. So what’s stopping them?”

    Most billionaires in the U.S in general are Democrats, even the WASP Goy billionaires like George Lucas, Bill Gates, and Warren Buffet for example. And the few who are Republicans, most of them are going to get behind the open borders pro-amnesty beta male RINO Jeb Bush.

  47. @ International Jew —

    FWIW I think it would be great if the 60-70% of our billionaires who are not Jewish would get off their butts and start supporting better Republican candidates than the ones we’re getting. So what’s stopping them?

    Billionaire status does not protect non-Jews from character assassination, career destruction, business destruction at the hands of Jewish billionaires. Thus, non-Jewish billionaires actually have more to lose than the average Joe.

    Henry Ford for example.

    Edwin Black explained the tactic in detail in “The Transfer Agreement.”

    I don’t think he was an antisemite, and so what if he was?
    Not liking Jews should not be any kind of test for functioning in the USA and acting to attempt to improve American culture, society, economy, etc. Henry Ford did all of the latter.

    I’m not sure if Charles Lindbergh was extremely wealthy but his status as an American hero did not protect him from being subjected to character assassination for daring to point out an ineluctable fact: Churchill, FDR, and Jews wanted war with Germany. Those facts were apparent from at least March 1933.

    As well, Jewish b’s are energized by a single incentive: Israel. Non-Jewish billionaires are funding all sorts of activism and positions across the social & political spectrum.

    Besides, if non-Jewish billionaires threw money around the way Jewish b’s do, elections would become even more of an auction to the highest bidder.

    Maybe they prefer to work in quieter, in ways that are more effective, by their lights.

  48. @Wally
    Open borders for all except apartheid 'Israel', that is.

    Open borders for all except apartheid ‘Israel’, that is.

    You say “apartheid” like it’s a bad word.

  49. @Ozymandias
    I've read it, many times. This was not my argument to begin with, it is the argument invariably presented to me when you ask a biblical scholar why they don't stone people for working on Sunday, or any of the other laws which they no longer choose to uphold. But it is a pick and choose religion, the parts you agree with you can cite the Bible as God's word backing your opinion, the parts you don't agree with can just be ignored.

    But it is a pick and choose religion, the parts you agree with you can cite the Bible as God’s word backing your opinion, the parts you don’t agree with can just be ignored.

    You are gravely mistaken.

    • Replies: @Ozymandias
    Again, not my philosophy, just an observation of the average believer.

    Can we assume then, that you maintain the prohibitions against pork and shellfish, don't follow any proselytizers with physical imperfections, don't eat leftovers after the third day (it is an abomination), kill your children if they talk back to you, have never had sex with a woman during her period, and so on, and so on.

    For any reasonable person, it quickly becomes apparent that severing the old testament from the new is the only tenable position. It's certainly far more respectable than professing a belief in laws that you don't respect, uphold, or, in all honesty, even have an awareness of. And please don't embarrass yourself by arguing that some of these rules can be ignored because they no longer apply to a modern world. That's the same damned argument the progressives used to foist acceptance of homosexuality on us.
  50. @advancedatheist

    I know homosexuals tend towards narcissism, but that is ridiculous.
     
    Do gay male public figures ever show signs of - what do you call it? - personal growth? emotional maturity? even "enlightenment"?

    In other words, do they ever reach a point of disgust with doing what a lot of gay men travel around the world doing, and then they admit that they no longer find it as fulfilling as they expected, and that perhaps gay men should structure their lives around healthier and more sustainable projects and goals?

    I've wondered about this lately because Roosh, the straight PUA/sex tourist who blogs about his sexual adventures and observations about life, has started to sound like he has reached diminishing returns after becoming so successful with picking up women - or at least so he claims - and he seems at a loss for what to do with the rest of his life.

    Almost all “sex tourists” involve themselves with prostitution. When I was reading through his forums a couple times, I noticed that most of the men there seemed to be chasing hookers. They didn’t seem happy though, they seemed unsatisfied with life. Some of them admitted to being alcoholics or even suicidal.

    I assume that, after a while, that type of lifestyle makes one depressed. Prostitution is psychologically often as exploitative for men as it for women.

  51. @International Jew
    FWIW I think it would be great if the 60-70% of our billionaires who are not Jewish would get off their butts and start supporting better Republican candidates than the ones we're getting. So what's stopping them?

    Good point.

    I think a lack of “asabiya” (social solidarity) is the issue here. Billionaire gentile Americans no longer feel kinship with regular Americans. Meanwhile, Jewish billionaires seem to have extreme (and increasing) levels of asabiya. That results in America doing nothing about free trade and immigration, but going insane over Israel’s national security.

  52. @Crassus
    What is the greatest advantage of these Jewish billionaires who put their money where their mouth is? They are among the few highly intelligent Americans who speak their minds in public. Non-billionaires with strong opinions are driven to online anonymity:
    http://worldcrass.com/2015/05/22/opinionated-americans-like-me-saudis-are-driven-to-an-anonymous-intellectual-life-on-twitter-nytimes-is-more-concerned-with-the-plight-of-saudis/

    Non-billionaires with strong opinions are driven to online anonymity.

    You don’t say.

  53. @Desiderius

    But it is a pick and choose religion, the parts you agree with you can cite the Bible as God’s word backing your opinion, the parts you don’t agree with can just be ignored.
     
    You are gravely mistaken.

    Again, not my philosophy, just an observation of the average believer.

    Can we assume then, that you maintain the prohibitions against pork and shellfish, don’t follow any proselytizers with physical imperfections, don’t eat leftovers after the third day (it is an abomination), kill your children if they talk back to you, have never had sex with a woman during her period, and so on, and so on.

    For any reasonable person, it quickly becomes apparent that severing the old testament from the new is the only tenable position. It’s certainly far more respectable than professing a belief in laws that you don’t respect, uphold, or, in all honesty, even have an awareness of. And please don’t embarrass yourself by arguing that some of these rules can be ignored because they no longer apply to a modern world. That’s the same damned argument the progressives used to foist acceptance of homosexuality on us.

    • Replies: @Desiderius

    Again, not my philosophy, just an observation of the average believer.
     
    The topic of conversation was religion, not philosophy. The practice of the average believer comes and goes from generation to generation, as it did in biblical times. If the religion in question is Christianity, then the standard is Christ, and none other, certainly not the average believer, however admirable or deleterious his practice.

    Can we assume then, that you maintain the prohibitions against pork and shellfish, don’t follow any proselytizers with physical imperfections, don’t eat leftovers after the third day (it is an abomination), kill your children if they talk back to you, have never had sex with a woman during her period, and so on, and so on.
     
    As I understand Christ's instructions from the six antitheses (i.e. the rest of the chapter), we are to faithfully determine the purpose of those laws and make sure we are acting in a manner congruent with those purposes, where practical exceeding the minima set forth by those laws in imitation of Christ's example, (i.e. in light of Acts 15, et. al.), but never falling short.

    For any reasonable person, it quickly becomes apparent that severing the old testament from the new is the only tenable position.
     
    You're in good company with Mr. Jefferson there. Again, however, Jesus' words are not consistent with your position, however tenable it seems to you, and those are the standard of the religion in question.

    It’s certainly far more respectable than professing a belief in laws that you don’t respect, uphold, or, in all honesty, even have an awareness of.
     
    My belief is in Christ, not laws. It is my understanding that he has commanded us to respect and uphold those laws, at a minimum, and better to exceed them, following His example.

    And please don’t embarrass yourself by arguing that some of these rules can be ignored because they no longer apply to a modern world. That’s the same damned argument the progressives used to foist acceptance of homosexuality on us.
     
    Indeed it is. None can be ignored. It would be better not to waste one's time on religion at all than to do so.
  54. Crassus [AKA "Ergot"] says: • Website

    The nihilistic pragmatism that characterizes cartoon billionaires is a trait that Hillary has in spades, and it’s one reason they like her.

    When Hillary was running for the Senate in 2000, I witnessed a formal debate between the spokesperson for a group of college Democrats and his counterpart representing campus Republicans. The conservative debater kept repeating, “She is an opportunist!” The liberal student answered, “Yes! Yes! You keep saying she leaps at opportunities. That’s what we want in a leader. She is a much better opportunist than Rick Lazio.”

    The liberal guy was a good friend of mine, and I later confirmed with him that he had been unaware of the connotation of ‘opportunist’, even though it was an Ivy League university. He acted embarrassed for a second, and then said, “Opportunist should’t have a negative connotation. Let’s try to change that.” My friend’s dream job was to work for Hillary. And he will probably get to, now that his current job is Director for International Economic Affairs at National Security Council, The White House (for real). Dave Mortlock, if you read this and remember that conversation, please don’t out me.

    In college, it made my skin crawl when my friend embraced the trait of opportunism. Now, however, I am as cynical as my friend:
    http://worldcrass.com/2015/05/23/this-latest-example-of-hillary-tacking-with-the-winds-reminds-me-of-why-i-might-vote-for-her-i-want-a-president-who-is-just-competent-and-isnt-necessarily-a-true-believer-in-particular-poli/

    • Replies: @Desiderius

    In college, it made my skin crawl when my friend embraced the trait of opportunism.
     
    See:

    http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/06/why-it-pays-to-be-a-jerk/392066/

    "Two people are told a cover story about a task they’re going to perform. One of them—a male confederate used in each pair throughout the study—steals coffee from a pot on a researcher’s desk. What effect does his stealing have on the other person’s willingness to put him in charge?

    The answer: It depends. If he simply steals one cup of coffee for himself, his power affordance shrinks slightly. If, on the other hand, he steals the pot and pours cups for himself and the other person, his power affordance spikes sharply. People want this man as their leader.

    I related this to Adam Grant. “What about the person who gets resources for the group without stealing coffee?” he asked. “That’s a comparison I would like to see.”

    It was a comparison, actually, that van Kleef had run. When the man did just that—poured coffee for the other person without stealing it—his ratings collapsed. Massively. He became less suited for leadership, in the eyes of others, than any other version of himself."
  55. @Ozymandias
    Again, not my philosophy, just an observation of the average believer.

    Can we assume then, that you maintain the prohibitions against pork and shellfish, don't follow any proselytizers with physical imperfections, don't eat leftovers after the third day (it is an abomination), kill your children if they talk back to you, have never had sex with a woman during her period, and so on, and so on.

    For any reasonable person, it quickly becomes apparent that severing the old testament from the new is the only tenable position. It's certainly far more respectable than professing a belief in laws that you don't respect, uphold, or, in all honesty, even have an awareness of. And please don't embarrass yourself by arguing that some of these rules can be ignored because they no longer apply to a modern world. That's the same damned argument the progressives used to foist acceptance of homosexuality on us.

    Again, not my philosophy, just an observation of the average believer.

    The topic of conversation was religion, not philosophy. The practice of the average believer comes and goes from generation to generation, as it did in biblical times. If the religion in question is Christianity, then the standard is Christ, and none other, certainly not the average believer, however admirable or deleterious his practice.

    Can we assume then, that you maintain the prohibitions against pork and shellfish, don’t follow any proselytizers with physical imperfections, don’t eat leftovers after the third day (it is an abomination), kill your children if they talk back to you, have never had sex with a woman during her period, and so on, and so on.

    As I understand Christ’s instructions from the six antitheses (i.e. the rest of the chapter), we are to faithfully determine the purpose of those laws and make sure we are acting in a manner congruent with those purposes, where practical exceeding the minima set forth by those laws in imitation of Christ’s example, (i.e. in light of Acts 15, et. al.), but never falling short.

    For any reasonable person, it quickly becomes apparent that severing the old testament from the new is the only tenable position.

    You’re in good company with Mr. Jefferson there. Again, however, Jesus’ words are not consistent with your position, however tenable it seems to you, and those are the standard of the religion in question.

    It’s certainly far more respectable than professing a belief in laws that you don’t respect, uphold, or, in all honesty, even have an awareness of.

    My belief is in Christ, not laws. It is my understanding that he has commanded us to respect and uphold those laws, at a minimum, and better to exceed them, following His example.

    And please don’t embarrass yourself by arguing that some of these rules can be ignored because they no longer apply to a modern world. That’s the same damned argument the progressives used to foist acceptance of homosexuality on us.

    Indeed it is. None can be ignored. It would be better not to waste one’s time on religion at all than to do so.

  56. @Crassus
    The nihilistic pragmatism that characterizes cartoon billionaires is a trait that Hillary has in spades, and it's one reason they like her.

    When Hillary was running for the Senate in 2000, I witnessed a formal debate between the spokesperson for a group of college Democrats and his counterpart representing campus Republicans. The conservative debater kept repeating, "She is an opportunist!" The liberal student answered, "Yes! Yes! You keep saying she leaps at opportunities. That's what we want in a leader. She is a much better opportunist than Rick Lazio."

    The liberal guy was a good friend of mine, and I later confirmed with him that he had been unaware of the connotation of 'opportunist', even though it was an Ivy League university. He acted embarrassed for a second, and then said, "Opportunist should't have a negative connotation. Let's try to change that." My friend's dream job was to work for Hillary. And he will probably get to, now that his current job is Director for International Economic Affairs at National Security Council, The White House (for real). Dave Mortlock, if you read this and remember that conversation, please don't out me.

    In college, it made my skin crawl when my friend embraced the trait of opportunism. Now, however, I am as cynical as my friend:
    http://worldcrass.com/2015/05/23/this-latest-example-of-hillary-tacking-with-the-winds-reminds-me-of-why-i-might-vote-for-her-i-want-a-president-who-is-just-competent-and-isnt-necessarily-a-true-believer-in-particular-poli/

    In college, it made my skin crawl when my friend embraced the trait of opportunism.

    See:

    http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/06/why-it-pays-to-be-a-jerk/392066/

    “Two people are told a cover story about a task they’re going to perform. One of them—a male confederate used in each pair throughout the study—steals coffee from a pot on a researcher’s desk. What effect does his stealing have on the other person’s willingness to put him in charge?

    The answer: It depends. If he simply steals one cup of coffee for himself, his power affordance shrinks slightly. If, on the other hand, he steals the pot and pours cups for himself and the other person, his power affordance spikes sharply. People want this man as their leader.

    I related this to Adam Grant. “What about the person who gets resources for the group without stealing coffee?” he asked. “That’s a comparison I would like to see.”

    It was a comparison, actually, that van Kleef had run. When the man did just that—poured coffee for the other person without stealing it—his ratings collapsed. Massively. He became less suited for leadership, in the eyes of others, than any other version of himself.”

  57. “As I understand Christ’s instructions from the six antitheses (i.e. the rest of the chapter), we are to faithfully determine the purpose of those laws and make sure we are acting in a manner congruent with those purposes…”

    Pick and choose it is then. Wasn’t that what I said to begin with?

    • Replies: @Desiderius

    Pick and choose it is then. Wasn’t that what I said to begin with?
     
    Is this an alternative handle for Truth (sic)?
  58. @Rob McX
    Is there any info on how many gays are actually liberal, as opposed to how many liberals are pro-gay? Voting for the Left's open-borders programme is insane from gays' point of view. White Western countries are the only places where the present level of homosexual activity would be tolerated, and there is no prospect of this state of affairs being replicated in any non-white society. If they think Europeans are homophobic, just wait till the Muslims take over.

    Exit polls for the last four presidential elections have shown, if memory serves, about a 3-to-1 Dem/Rep split for the homosexual vote. Don’t know about outside the US but it is probably less stark, insofar as center-right parties in most other advanced countries are less conservative on cultural issues compared to the GOP (e.g., it was Tory Cameron who delivered homosexual marriage to Britain), thus leaving homosexual voters free to vote on other matters.

    • Replies: @Desiderius

    leaving homosexual voters free to vote on other matters
     
    Please. Very few homosexuals give a flying flip about getting married. They're just as free to vote on other matters here as there, they're just terrified of being unfashionable.
  59. Re: Paul Singer, he is a real piece of work. Not only does he donate to Republican campaigns in order to push his leftist views on immigration and homosexuality, he also uses his Jewish lucre to corrupt Christianity. He is the top donor to the Evangelical Immigration Table, a “Christian” pro-amnesty organ that is actually a front for Singer, Soros, Walmart, and the Chamber of Commerce to further their anti-white/corporate greed interests.

    This brings up a larger point: Savvy Jews don’t just donate to candidates; they also drop serious coin on think tanks and activist groups, which influence elite and public opinion, irrespective of who wins this or that election. A lot of evangelical Christians might encounter the EIT’s open borders propaganda and think they are hearing an authentic voice from their coreligionists, when they are really just being played by puppetmasters who despise that same evangelical audience.

  60. anon • Disclaimer says:

    I think the question is more “why not do it” than “why do it”.

    It’s in the interests of billionaire oligarchs to drive down wages (actually it isn’t long term but let’s assume they believe it) and that financial interest applies as a pretty much constant pressure in one direction so that’s the why do it.

    What reason would they have not to do it?

    The Jewish ones don’t do the same thing in Israel as they do in the US because blood outweighs greed.

    That reason doesn’t apply in the US.

    However that reason doesn’t apply to the non-Jewish elites either – not any more – the blood ties aren’t strong enough. America isn’t German enough for the German ones or Anglo enough for the Anglo ones or etc.

    So the battle was lost at an earlier point when America wasn’t kept homogenous enough for the elite to have an interest in preserving the population (which may have always been impossible given the size of the place).

    If there was a chance to give America enough time to homogenize the chance was lost during the 1880-1965 battle over immigration.

    imo

    Why is Europe doing the same? US pressure.

  61. @Ozymandias
    "As I understand Christ’s instructions from the six antitheses (i.e. the rest of the chapter), we are to faithfully determine the purpose of those laws and make sure we are acting in a manner congruent with those purposes..."

    Pick and choose it is then. Wasn't that what I said to begin with?

    Pick and choose it is then. Wasn’t that what I said to begin with?

    Is this an alternative handle for Truth (sic)?

  62. @Noah172
    Exit polls for the last four presidential elections have shown, if memory serves, about a 3-to-1 Dem/Rep split for the homosexual vote. Don't know about outside the US but it is probably less stark, insofar as center-right parties in most other advanced countries are less conservative on cultural issues compared to the GOP (e.g., it was Tory Cameron who delivered homosexual marriage to Britain), thus leaving homosexual voters free to vote on other matters.

    leaving homosexual voters free to vote on other matters

    Please. Very few homosexuals give a flying flip about getting married. They’re just as free to vote on other matters here as there, they’re just terrified of being unfashionable.

  63. Whites are more niggardly than the Jews.

    Reminds me of the story about the man, freezing by the woodstove, shaking a log at the oven and shouting “If you give me warmth, I’ll give you wood!” No, you have to give to get.

    Core Europeans still tend to have this quaint notion that good governance should be free (i.e., they pay for it with their taxes). We shoulda thought about that before we let the Jews & everyone else in.

  64. Very interesting.

    Is there any significant variance from the donation habits of goyische billionaires?

    There’s a big difference between Jewish billionaire proxies, and European billionaire proxies:

    http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/1509/
    http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/1510/

  65. “Apparently the top issues for Jewish billionaires, whether Republican or Democrat, are supporting Israel, opposing financial regulation and supporting gay rights. ”

    How much of the $8 billion in aid a year to Israel comes back to the US as bribes to politicians from jewish billionaires?

  66. @James Walker
    Matthew Weiner wouldn't be pleased to see that Charles Koch has somehow become a member of the Tribe.

    James Walker, I believe you made the same mistake I initially made in reading the list. You assumed that the list was of “Jewish billionaires,” whereas it is a list of billionaires making substantial political contributions. Whereas you reacted to the Koch brothers inclusion on the list, my first reaction was to the first name on the list, Tom Steyer. I thought to myself “I didn’t realize Steyer was Jewish.” (Not that I had given the matter any thought.) It was seeing the Kochs listed that made me realize that the list was not of Jewish billionaires but of billionaires generally. (Out of curiosity I discovered that Tom Steyer is half Jewish, for what it is worth (his father was Jewish, his mother Episcopalian.) Any objection I have to Steyer is not based on his religion but to his position on global warming.)

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
How a Young Syndicate Lawyer from Chicago Earned a Fortune Looting the Property of the Japanese-Americans, then Lived...
Becker update V1.3.2