The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Why the Establishment Is So Berserk Over Trump Talking Sense on Immigration
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 my new column in Taki’s Magazine:

The Orlando Latino gay slaughter is a nightmare for the establishment because Florida is a purple state with 29 electoral votes. And while the mainstream efforts to elicit Hispanic racialism haven’t gotten all that far outside of La Raza circles, gays have become a popular sacralized group. Trump’s alt-center offer to defend gays from Muslims is part of his clever divide-and-rule strategy aimed at the obvious (but henceforth unspeakable) divisions among the Obama Coalition.

As I’ve been pointing out for years, the Democrats’ coalition of the fringes has been held together only by the KKKrazy Glue of egging on paranoid fantasies against straight white men.

But the GOP upstart is asking gays: Who is more likely to be on your side: Donald Trump or Omar Mateen?

Personally, I’ve been to Trump Tower, and I’d guess that the GOP candidate employed more than a few gay men to decorate it.

Read the whole thing there.

 
Hide 267 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. I followed your link in the article to The New Colossus, and was reminded that it is a remarkably beautiful poem. Circa 1883, when it was written, its sentiments were quite correct.

    Nobody writes this well anymore:

    Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
    With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
    Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
    A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
    Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
    Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
    The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

    “Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
    With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

    • Replies: @vinteuil
    @Lot

    The first nine lines of the sonnet are pretty bad. The last five are, unfortunately, brilliant & unforgettable.

    , @Anonymous
    @Lot

    I hate that poem.Can't we give that lousy statue to mexico or better yet,Israel?

    Replies: @Chris Mallory, @Buzz Mohawk, @oh its just me too

    , @Big Bill
    @Lot

    Placing a plaque with Emma's poem on the base of the Statue of Liberty was the single greatest act of Jewish propaganda* in the history of the world.

    The statue, a French gift to the American people, was created to honor our shared Enlightenment values ("the Statue of Liberty Enlightening the World"). The statue took years to build with donations from hundreds of thousands of Americans and Frenchmen. It stands 305 feet tall and weighs 450,000 pounds.

    Yet it was converted into a monument for open borders and free Jewish immigration to the USA by the addition of a 500 pound plaque with Emma Lazarus's words.

    500 pounds versus 450,000 pounds. That, my friends, is 1000-to-1 leverage. A brilliant propaganda coup.

    Imagine you could put your own personal bronze plaque on statues, bridges, office buildings, dams, sculptures and paintings, explaining the "real meaning" and "true significance" of all of them.

    Imagine that tens of thousands of children and adults would be brought to read your plaque every year, to gaze upward and to reflect with awe and dedication on the importance of your words.

    Imagine that the entire country would, over time, commit itself to the principles you expressed.

    What a propaganda coup! Absolutely brilliant.

    * it was so powerful that Eddie Bernays (author of "Propaganda") leveraged the Statue of Liberty in his "Torches of Freedom" cigarette propaganda campaign in the 1929 NYC Easter Parade.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    , @SPMoore8
    @Lot

    Thumbs down on the Lazarus poem. You'd have to read some Tennyson or Browning to see how bad her poetic skills actually were for her time. Furthermore, as an attempt to write what amounts to an Elizabethan era sonnet, it literally groans under the weight of its own storied pomp. I'll grant that the last five lines are pretty memorable, or maybe it's just because I have heard them so many times.

    Replies: @Lot

    , @PiltdownMan
    @Lot

    It's overwrought.

    , @boogerbently
    @Lot

    From Wiki:

    Lazarus was born into a large Sephardic-Ashkenazi Jewish family, the fourth of seven children of Moses Lazarus and Esther Nathan,[3] The Lazarus family was from Germany....

    Suspicions confirmed.

    , @Hippopotamusdrome
    @Lot

    I especially like the 'wretched refuse' part.

    Replies: @candid_observer

    , @Kylie
    @Lot

    "I followed your link in the article to The New Colossus, and was reminded that it is a remarkably beautiful poem. Circa 1883, when it was written, its sentiments were quite correct."

    Are you kidding no question mark. The poem is overwritten, overwrought and worst of all, overexposed. Its sentiments were never correct. True liberty carries with it responsibility and much of the world's population, however wretched, is simply unable to cope with it.

    "Nobody writes this well anymore."

    Enoch Powell wrote far, far better than that. I will never forget the shock of reading his libelously misnamed "Rivers of Blood" speech. I was overwhelmed with the clarity of his thoughts and the beauty of their expression.

    Replies: @yaqub the mad scientist, @Dave Pinsen, @Lot, @Jenner Ickham Errican

    , @Njguy73
    @Lot

    “Freedom is in danger of degenerating into mere arbitrariness unless it is lived in terms of responsibleness. That is why I recommend that the Statue of Liberty on the East Coast be supplemented by a Statue of Responsibility on the West Coast.” - Viktor Frankl

    , @SFG
    @Lot

    Lot, you really should have known this response was coming. How long have you been posting here? I'm not going to accuse you of trolling, though even Steve does it from time to time (remember the Otto Skorzeny-in-the-Mossad post?). Naah, man, you goofed.

    Emma Lazarus probably was writing on behalf of her coreligionists in Russia. Whether they were a plus or minus for America--well, you have to weigh a lot of bright people against a lot of leftists (with a lot of overlap), and which way you come out has a lot to do with your political views. On the one hand, polio vaccine, relativity, the Bomb, and Hollywood. On the other hand, Communism, feminism, anti-whitism, and Hollywood. I find it hard to believe there would be no Left without Jews--the factory workers were eventually going to want to do *something* about their awful conditions in the early Industrial Revolution. Similarly, segregation was really getting to be an embarrassment in the Cold War. But it would have taken another shape, and what that would be is impossible to guess. European countries with few Jews have a Left, and in many ways it is more effective than ours. I suspect the net effect in the USA might be to shift the Left from economic to cultural leftism (of which I personally do not approve). But--my guess, and that and .50 will buy you one of those cheap plastic toys from the dispensers in the supermarket. I feel your pain--make an account where you don't out yourself as a hemi-Jew and advocate for immigration restriction--that Targets 2016 thing was a bloody good idea and I bet your ancestry is why everyone's ignoring it. Go underground, rename and repackage it, and post about it on one of these weird alt-right sites. Hopefully they'll be smart enough to also target all the sitting representatives who *aren't* members of the tribe instead of just sending tasteless Holocaust tweets to the ten (or however many) Jews on the list.

    The overall Great Wave we probably did need to fill out the factories. Now we have more people than jobs, and illiterate immigrants aren't inventing Google.

    The poem itself? On purely poetic grounds I kind of like it--the archaic (for our time) style pleases me, and it is inspiring. The sentiment itself is wrong for our time.

    Replies: @Lot

    , @Olorin
    @Lot


    Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
    With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
     
    Actually the Colossus of Rhodes stood on a marble pedestal and was toppled in an earthquake after about 70 years of giving thanks to Helias for helping Rhodes stave off invasion. IOW, it was erected as a testimony to controlled borders.

    Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
     

    Last I checked, the sun rose over NY Harbor. But I guess she was talking about the view from the Lower East Side. Which always had as peculiar a view of The West as did Chelsea.

    A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning,
     
    Let's just pass over the 19th-century-pop-tech-culture in this one, and remember instead Mark Twain and Tesla.

    and her name
    Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
    Glows world-wide welcome;
     
    This is where the Crazy Cat Lady stuff starts.

    “Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
    With silent lips.
     
    Crying with silent lips--I wouldn't let that pass in a HS poetry-writing class.

    The next lines are the heavy duty Crazy Cat Lady ones.

    Sorry, Lot, but it's crap. Like most of 20th century NY pop culture.

    Interesting note: as one of (((Jozsef Pulitzer's))) key figures behind putting (((her and others'))) money behind installing that atrocity in NY Harbor, Lazarus submitted her own doggerel verse, written in 1883, to be carved into the base in 1903.

    The atrocity itself was originally intended to embody French sculptors' centennial commemoration of American Independence. It was turned into a symbol of American invasion.

    My favorite part of any megadoom movie set in NYC is when the thing comes down. Wish the Sept. 11 terrorists had felt the same way...which would also have given "Emily "I Am The Twin Towers' Doe" a much better metaphor for her 12,000-word confabulation regarding her drunken slutty outing.

    House Members Unite to Read Stanford Rape Victim’s Letter
    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/us/politics/congress-stanford-letter.html?_r=0

    Your tax dollars at work. $85 an hour times 435 = about $37K

  2. @Lot
    I followed your link in the article to The New Colossus, and was reminded that it is a remarkably beautiful poem. Circa 1883, when it was written, its sentiments were quite correct.

    Nobody writes this well anymore:

    Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
    With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
    Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
    A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
    Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
    Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
    The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

    "Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
    With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
     

    Replies: @vinteuil, @Anonymous, @Big Bill, @SPMoore8, @PiltdownMan, @boogerbently, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Kylie, @Njguy73, @SFG, @Olorin

    The first nine lines of the sonnet are pretty bad. The last five are, unfortunately, brilliant & unforgettable.

  3. This column was nearly the perfect iSteve piece, lacking only references to IQ and the mid-20/c southern California aerospace industry. Oh, and golf-course design.

  4. “As I’ve been pointing out for years, the Democrats’ coalition of the fringes has been held together only by the KKKrazy Glue of egging on paranoid fantasies against [normal] white men.”

    I assume you haven’t watched the gaystream media coverage of this glorious act, Steve. No one is blaming Mr. Mateen’s religion for his courageous actions — they’re blaming guns. It’s all about gun control because the gaystreamers refuse to pin it on Islam, as that would be Islamophobic.

    Now, had Mr. Mateen been a Christian, the gaystreamers would breathlessly and orgasmically blame Christianity for his homophobia [sic] and thus condemn all White Christians of normal sexuality.

    No, the megaphone, the Cathedral, The Narrative, the gaystream media can deal with these seeming conundrums just fine. You need to stop masturbating in public, my man.

    Je suis Omar Mateen.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Je Suis Omar Mateen

    Yes, last night 11 out of 10 late night talk show hosts all denounced guns and those dirty NRA no-goodniks who allow us to own guns. Is there like a jornolist II that sends out talking points from the Hillary campaign?

    I get the feeling though that this is starting not to work. Hillary said in 2008 that she had not shattered the (imaginary) glass ceiling but that there were now lots of cracks in it. I get the feeling that there are beginning to be cracks in the Democrat coalition.

    You have to be pretty desperate to try to connect Omar Mateen to the white frat boy "rapist" from Stanford as if nobody is going to notice that there is a little something different about Omar. And while there are lots of low information voters, most people, no matter how stupid, realize on some level that guns do not walk into nightclubs and go on rampages by themselves. And there is the little detail that Omar was a professional security guard and even in most countries where they don't allow ordinary people to have guns, security guards have access to them.

    Besides being an obvious red herring, the anti-gun crowd has to explain how, if we are not going to build a fence (and god forbid we should do such a thing), it is possible to smuggle across 11 million human beings and mucho tons of drugs every year, but there's no way that guns will come across the border once we make them illegal here.

    You can TRY to change the subject but now you have the candidate of one of the two major parties loudly NOTICING and saying the I-word and it's going to be hard to memory hole Omar's pledge of allegiance to the Islamic State and retcon him into a hateful white man like George Zimmerman. Maybe if he had changed his name to Omar Zimmerman?

    You can denounce Trump as a badthinking racis' and try talking about guns instead but he is going to be on the teevee every day at least from now until November so it's not going to be that easy to shut him up like some poor schmuck whom you can force out of his job for having said a bad word. Even Hillary had to (reluctantly) say the I-word in order to avoid being outflanked by Trump or looking like a total fool.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @IBC, @Heretic

  5. So what’s the endgame?

    It seems that the argument is that heterosexual white male Christians (and the women they have convinced to love them) are the problem.

    If this group was eliminated would the world be a better place?

    • Replies: @Thea
    @Tiny Duck

    No this group needs to stick around. Opposition to white Christian men is the only unifying force they have.

    , @Jeff
    @Tiny Duck

    It's not that they are to be eliminated, it's that they're to be castrated, so to speak. TPTB just need mindless labor.

  6. @Lot
    I followed your link in the article to The New Colossus, and was reminded that it is a remarkably beautiful poem. Circa 1883, when it was written, its sentiments were quite correct.

    Nobody writes this well anymore:

    Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
    With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
    Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
    A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
    Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
    Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
    The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

    "Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
    With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
     

    Replies: @vinteuil, @Anonymous, @Big Bill, @SPMoore8, @PiltdownMan, @boogerbently, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Kylie, @Njguy73, @SFG, @Olorin

    I hate that poem.Can’t we give that lousy statue to mexico or better yet,Israel?

    • Replies: @Chris Mallory
    @Anonymous

    We can keep the statue. We just need to jackhammer that wretched plaque off the base . The statue stood for 17 years before they added that dreck.

    Replies: @Big Bill

    , @Buzz Mohawk
    @Anonymous

    The statue stands for liberty. It has nothing to do with the poem.

    The poem is self-serving graffiti that was slapped on later by a small group of "Americans" to co-opt the statue.

    Replies: @Marcus, @Jack D

    , @oh its just me too
    @Anonymous

    I hate almost as much as the baby boomer anthem "imagine"

  7. “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

  8. I think it’s safe to bet that most immigration enthusiasts haven’t really study Lazarus’s poem. It’s specifically about immigration from Europe, or taking in the “wretched refuse” of Europe. I don’t think anyone in the late 19th or early 20th century was even thinking about immigration from Central America or the Middle East.

    • Replies: @Lot
    @JohnnyD


    I think it’s safe to bet that most immigration enthusiasts haven’t really study Lazarus’s poem. It’s specifically about immigration from Europe, or taking in the “wretched refuse” of Europe.
     
    Exactly. In the early 1880's, immigration was largely of Irish, Italians, Germans, Slavs, and Jews, not Syrian rapeugees and Somali welfare jihadis.

    The great wave of European immigration Lazarus was writing about grew the white percentage of the population of the USA from about 80% in 1830 to 90% in 1930.


    I don’t think anyone in the late 19th or early 20th century was even thinking about immigration from Central America or the Middle East.
     
    Central America/Mexico had much lower population densities, so much more land and resources per person, compared to now. Their middle and upper classes had no reason to leave, and their lower classes were illiterate and without the means to travel or knowledge of anything about the United States.

    The era did see a steady stream of Christian middle east immigration fleeing Muslim massacres, but the basic economic dynamic that kept out latin americans applied to Muslim middle easterners.
    , @ben tillman
    @JohnnyD


    I think it’s safe to bet that most immigration enthusiasts haven’t really study Lazarus’s poem. It’s specifically about immigration from Europe, or taking in the “wretched refuse” of Europe. I don’t think anyone in the late 19th or early 20th century was even thinking about immigration from Central America or the Middle East.
     
    You don't need to think about it to advocate it. Things like that just come naturally for some.
  9. Heretofore, not henceforth.

  10. Leftist conservative [AKA "corporate slave wandering down fluorescent hallway"] says: • Website

    the establishment hates trump talking sense about immigration because our ponzi scheme economy is only just held together by the growth provided by immigration.

    And leading liberals (and most GOP leaders) do whatever the Establishment wants

    • Replies: @Realist
    @Leftist conservative

    You are absolutely right. Our economy is dependent on population growth

    Replies: @anon

  11. OT: The Derb’s excellent insight “Better Dead Than Rude” gets quoted by Ed Driscoll over at Insty’s place this morning: https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/236293/

  12. @Lot
    I followed your link in the article to The New Colossus, and was reminded that it is a remarkably beautiful poem. Circa 1883, when it was written, its sentiments were quite correct.

    Nobody writes this well anymore:

    Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
    With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
    Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
    A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
    Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
    Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
    The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

    "Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
    With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
     

    Replies: @vinteuil, @Anonymous, @Big Bill, @SPMoore8, @PiltdownMan, @boogerbently, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Kylie, @Njguy73, @SFG, @Olorin

    Placing a plaque with Emma’s poem on the base of the Statue of Liberty was the single greatest act of Jewish propaganda* in the history of the world.

    The statue, a French gift to the American people, was created to honor our shared Enlightenment values (“the Statue of Liberty Enlightening the World”). The statue took years to build with donations from hundreds of thousands of Americans and Frenchmen. It stands 305 feet tall and weighs 450,000 pounds.

    Yet it was converted into a monument for open borders and free Jewish immigration to the USA by the addition of a 500 pound plaque with Emma Lazarus’s words.

    500 pounds versus 450,000 pounds. That, my friends, is 1000-to-1 leverage. A brilliant propaganda coup.

    Imagine you could put your own personal bronze plaque on statues, bridges, office buildings, dams, sculptures and paintings, explaining the “real meaning” and “true significance” of all of them.

    Imagine that tens of thousands of children and adults would be brought to read your plaque every year, to gaze upward and to reflect with awe and dedication on the importance of your words.

    Imagine that the entire country would, over time, commit itself to the principles you expressed.

    What a propaganda coup! Absolutely brilliant.

    * it was so powerful that Eddie Bernays (author of “Propaganda”) leveraged the Statue of Liberty in his “Torches of Freedom” cigarette propaganda campaign in the 1929 NYC Easter Parade.

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    @Big Bill

    Even without the poem, it's likely the statue would have gained an association with immigration anyway, given its proximity to Ellis Island.

    If the statue were erected on the mall in D.C., maybe not.

    Replies: @1stTimeCallerLongTimeListener

  13. @Anonymous
    @Lot

    I hate that poem.Can't we give that lousy statue to mexico or better yet,Israel?

    Replies: @Chris Mallory, @Buzz Mohawk, @oh its just me too

    We can keep the statue. We just need to jackhammer that wretched plaque off the base . The statue stood for 17 years before they added that dreck.

    • Replies: @Big Bill
    @Chris Mallory

    The Statue was originally in accord with the Founders' conception of America: a Beacon of light shining out across a dark, savage, barbarian world to be a living example of how they should reform themselves, their nations, their cultures, and their countries.

    America as a Global Inspiration, enlightening others by its living example.

    As Emma's tribe deconstructed and reconstructed it, the Statue of Liberty became a Beacon shining out to invite all the dark, savage barbarians to abandon their countries, abandon their nations, abandon their cultures, and to come set up their own little colonies in America.

    America as a Global Dump, receiving uncivilized barbarian trash from across the planet.

  14. A gay Muslim kills 49 gay Hispanics, and, according to the president, it’s my fault.

    Hey, I’m sorry. I won’t do it again. Pinky promise.

  15. @Anonymous
    @Lot

    I hate that poem.Can't we give that lousy statue to mexico or better yet,Israel?

    Replies: @Chris Mallory, @Buzz Mohawk, @oh its just me too

    The statue stands for liberty. It has nothing to do with the poem.

    The poem is self-serving graffiti that was slapped on later by a small group of “Americans” to co-opt the statue.

    • Agree: tbraton
    • Replies: @Marcus
    @Buzz Mohawk

    The statue represents masonic/enlightenment ideals: dismantle it, I say.

    Replies: @anonymous

    , @Jack D
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Emma Lazarus's ancestors arrived in the US before the American Revolution, probably before yours did.

    Replies: @AlphaSupremo, @SPMoore8, @Dirk Dagger, @iSteveFan, @woodNfish, @tbraton, @Yo Trump, @Chris Mallory, @Buzz Mohawk, @AnotherDad

  16. Liberals declare, as though a self-evident truth: “We can’t go to war with the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims.” Why not? For decades we were at war with that other ideology bent on world domination, communism. Roughly the same number of people were communists in the 1950s as are Muslims today. (Tally up the populations of Red China, the USSR, North Vietnam, North Korea, Cuba, and so on.) We had a sign at the border, too: “Commies Keep Out!” We had in effect a religious test based on your beliefs: If you served the Communist Party, you couldn’t hold certain jobs or participate in the military, even if you were legally an American citizen.

    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @iSteveFan
    @Mark Caplan

    Agree. While in school during the late 1980s, my school offered a course entitled "Communism: One third of the World". One third of the world is a much larger proportion than one fifth.

    , @Travis
    @Mark Caplan

    we still have restrictions to prevent National Socialists or any former members from entering the United States. The U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act still makes ineligible for permanent residence a person who “is or has been a member of or affiliated with the Communist Party".

    all travelers into the US must answer the following question today before being admitted.
    Have you ever Been a member of or affiliated with the Communist Party or Nazi government of Germany ?

    it is clear we could follow the Jimmy Carter example and deny entry to all aliens from Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia etc...with an exception for Christians who face persecution in these nations.

  17. Fancy how you managed to peg Emma Lazarus as a “Zionist” inasmuch as she died a decade before the Zionist movement was founded. Why not just say “Jew”? That is, of course, what you mean.

    • Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky
    @Jimi Shmendrix

    "Fancy how you managed to peg Emma Lazarus as a “Zionist” inasmuch as she died a decade before the Zionist movement was founded. Why not just say “Jew”? That is, of course, what you mean."

    Sorry bubbele, but according to the article below on the World Zionist Organization website, she was an advocate for a Jewish state, so Steve's characterization is fair. Steve's description of her as a Zionist had the effect in my mind of highlighting her monumental hypocrisy (i.e., Jews get their own state, while the American goyim must accept as potential citizens whatever dreck manages to wash up on their shores [and this as a moral imperative, per her loathsome poem]).

    http://www.wzo.org.il/index.php?dir=site&page=articles&op=item&cs=3318&langpage=heb&category=3040&language=eng

    Replies: @Bee, @Bee

    , @1stTimeCallerLongTimeListener
    @Jimi Shmendrix

    per Wikipedia: She is an important forerunner of the Zionist movement. She argued for the creation of a Jewish homeland thirteen years before Theodor Herzl began to use the term Zionism.

    , @check ur priv
    @Jimi Shmendrix

    Lazarus express support for a 'jewish homeland' before the formal start of the zionist movement.

    , @ben tillman
    @Jimi Shmendrix


    Fancy how you managed to peg Emma Lazarus as a “Zionist” inasmuch as she died a decade before the Zionist movement was founded.
     
    Thanks for the mendacity. Zionism has been around for centuries.

    Replies: @Jimi Shmendrix

    , @peterike
    @Jimi Shmendrix


    Fancy how you managed to peg Emma Lazarus as a “Zionist” inasmuch as she died a decade before the Zionist movement was founded. Why not just say “Jew”? That is, of course, what you mean.

     

    Facts, dear boy, facts.

    She [Lazarus] is an important forerunner of the Zionist movement. She argued for the creation of a Jewish homeland thirteen years before Theodor Herzl began to use the term Zionism.

     

  18. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Anonymous

    The statue stands for liberty. It has nothing to do with the poem.

    The poem is self-serving graffiti that was slapped on later by a small group of "Americans" to co-opt the statue.

    Replies: @Marcus, @Jack D

    The statue represents masonic/enlightenment ideals: dismantle it, I say.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    @Marcus

    Phooey to what the statue "represents".

    The armature was Eiffel's warming-up exercise for his skeletal Tower. Eiffel was one of the world's great innovators, pioneering the use of cast iron for large substructures--erector set like.

    "The same year Eiffel started work on a system of standardised prefabricated bridges, an idea that was the result of a conversation with the governor of Cochin-China. These used a small number of standard components, all small enough to be readily transportable in areas with poor or non-existent roads, and were joined together using bolts rather than rivets, reducing the need for skilled labour on site" Wiki

  19. @Je Suis Omar Mateen
    "As I’ve been pointing out for years, the Democrats’ coalition of the fringes has been held together only by the KKKrazy Glue of egging on paranoid fantasies against [normal] white men."

    I assume you haven't watched the gaystream media coverage of this glorious act, Steve. No one is blaming Mr. Mateen's religion for his courageous actions -- they're blaming guns. It's all about gun control because the gaystreamers refuse to pin it on Islam, as that would be Islamophobic.

    Now, had Mr. Mateen been a Christian, the gaystreamers would breathlessly and orgasmically blame Christianity for his homophobia [sic] and thus condemn all White Christians of normal sexuality.

    No, the megaphone, the Cathedral, The Narrative, the gaystream media can deal with these seeming conundrums just fine. You need to stop masturbating in public, my man.

    Je suis Omar Mateen.

    Replies: @Jack D

    Yes, last night 11 out of 10 late night talk show hosts all denounced guns and those dirty NRA no-goodniks who allow us to own guns. Is there like a jornolist II that sends out talking points from the Hillary campaign?

    I get the feeling though that this is starting not to work. Hillary said in 2008 that she had not shattered the (imaginary) glass ceiling but that there were now lots of cracks in it. I get the feeling that there are beginning to be cracks in the Democrat coalition.

    You have to be pretty desperate to try to connect Omar Mateen to the white frat boy “rapist” from Stanford as if nobody is going to notice that there is a little something different about Omar. And while there are lots of low information voters, most people, no matter how stupid, realize on some level that guns do not walk into nightclubs and go on rampages by themselves. And there is the little detail that Omar was a professional security guard and even in most countries where they don’t allow ordinary people to have guns, security guards have access to them.

    Besides being an obvious red herring, the anti-gun crowd has to explain how, if we are not going to build a fence (and god forbid we should do such a thing), it is possible to smuggle across 11 million human beings and mucho tons of drugs every year, but there’s no way that guns will come across the border once we make them illegal here.

    You can TRY to change the subject but now you have the candidate of one of the two major parties loudly NOTICING and saying the I-word and it’s going to be hard to memory hole Omar’s pledge of allegiance to the Islamic State and retcon him into a hateful white man like George Zimmerman. Maybe if he had changed his name to Omar Zimmerman?

    You can denounce Trump as a badthinking racis’ and try talking about guns instead but he is going to be on the teevee every day at least from now until November so it’s not going to be that easy to shut him up like some poor schmuck whom you can force out of his job for having said a bad word. Even Hillary had to (reluctantly) say the I-word in order to avoid being outflanked by Trump or looking like a total fool.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    @Jack D

    "And while there are lots of low information voters, most people, no matter how stupid, realize on some level that guns do not walk into nightclubs and go on rampages by themselves."

    Never underestimate the stupidity of American voters.

    , @IBC
    @Jack D

    Some good points, but you have to admit that American gun "culture" is part of the problem. For example, preliminary reports are indicating that the Orlando shooter may have first been "radicalized" at a 4H shooting sports event in Idaho, which also happened to coincide with a seminar on goat "husbandry" given by a 13 year old boy, who was especially known to some on social media, for his golden curls and lithesome form... Now, I read somewhere else (Slate? Rolling Stone?) that Haven Monahan has a younger redneck cousin --so that story does seem plausible.

    Replies: @Jack D

    , @Heretic
    @Jack D

    Jack D's point regarding the porousness of the border to guns goes under-noticed.

    You don't have the luxury of holding the spigots full-to-open on illegals, drugs and other detritus with slack border controls, while selectively avoiding the bypassing of domestic gun policies via the same channels.

    Make the liars choose.

  20. Of course they are talking about guns, because the public associates white men with defense of gun rights and they are the common enemy of the Democratic coalition, according to their theology. Heaven forbid we point out that the US is overall incredibly tolerant of gays (and just about everyone else as well) and the most virulently homophobic societies can be found in Africa and the Middle East.

    But amid all the din about Trump’s reaction to this, I don’t see how this really hurts him. The people who sincerely believe the biggest reason for mass casualty attacks are the availability of long guns rather than the ideology that motivates people to murder large numbers of strangers are not GOP voters under any circumstances. Perhaps people are finally able to admit to themselves what the common thread is in the Hebdo, Bataclan, Orlando, San Bernardino, and Boston attacks are (I know I am leaving some others out).

  21. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Anonymous

    The statue stands for liberty. It has nothing to do with the poem.

    The poem is self-serving graffiti that was slapped on later by a small group of "Americans" to co-opt the statue.

    Replies: @Marcus, @Jack D

    Emma Lazarus’s ancestors arrived in the US before the American Revolution, probably before yours did.

    • Replies: @AlphaSupremo
    @Jack D

    BHO also has ancestors who arrived before the American Revolution. Do you think that absolves him from responsibility for his radical beliefs vis a vis our borders?

    , @SPMoore8
    @Jack D

    You are right about Emma's ancestors but your OP is also right that the poem was likely motivated by her solicitude for Russian Jews fleeing persecution during this time (1883). Moreover, the poem was in fact put onto the statue 20 years later.

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

    Replies: @Jack D

    , @Dirk Dagger
    @Jack D

    Wasn't Mohawks here first?

    , @iSteveFan
    @Jack D

    Do you consider her founding stock?

    Replies: @Jack D

    , @woodNfish
    @Jack D

    Your response has nothing to do with the fact that the poem sucks and is complete bullshit. Some people probably think it is part of the constitution. Maybe you do too.

    , @tbraton
    @Jack D

    So? That doesn't undercut the poster's point in any way.

    , @Yo Trump
    @Jack D

    Well, what she wrote is still self-serving graffiti and slapped on later by a small group of “Americans” to co-opt the statue.

    , @Chris Mallory
    @Jack D

    My ancestors have hers beat by 100 years. She isn't Founding Stock, but a parasite hanging on the British Protestant nation that my ancestors founded.

    , @Buzz Mohawk
    @Jack D

    Your comment is irrelevant, but since you brought it up:

    My ancestors began arriving in America in the mid-1600's. They were English Protestants who were among the earliest residents of New Haven, Connecticut.

    How's that, Jack?

    , @AnotherDad
    @Jack D


    Emma Lazarus’s ancestors arrived in the US before the American Revolution, probably before yours did.
     
    Which pretty much makes the point i've argued with you before:

    Having a separate tribal group in one's nation--particularly a successful one--is a bad idea.

    Here Lazarus's family had been in America for 100+ years, and yet her keen interest was her co-tribals in Russia, rather than what is good for her nominally "fellow" Americans.

    Now in fairness, Lazarus could not know what a disaster these eastern Jews would ultimately be for America, with their success coupled with contempt for American gentiles, radical politics, anti-Christianity, anti-traditionalism, anti-republicanism, anti-nationalism. But the point isn't just the outcome we see before us as we grasp at last straws like Trump. It's that her innate tendency was to succor her tribe not her fellow citizens.

    Of course, this is entirely human. Which is why letting foreign, and especially endogamous, tribes in your nation is a *bad idea*.
  22. @Jack D
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Emma Lazarus's ancestors arrived in the US before the American Revolution, probably before yours did.

    Replies: @AlphaSupremo, @SPMoore8, @Dirk Dagger, @iSteveFan, @woodNfish, @tbraton, @Yo Trump, @Chris Mallory, @Buzz Mohawk, @AnotherDad

    BHO also has ancestors who arrived before the American Revolution. Do you think that absolves him from responsibility for his radical beliefs vis a vis our borders?

  23. @Mark Caplan
    Liberals declare, as though a self-evident truth: "We can't go to war with the world's 1.6 billion Muslims." Why not? For decades we were at war with that other ideology bent on world domination, communism. Roughly the same number of people were communists in the 1950s as are Muslims today. (Tally up the populations of Red China, the USSR, North Vietnam, North Korea, Cuba, and so on.) We had a sign at the border, too: "Commies Keep Out!" We had in effect a religious test based on your beliefs: If you served the Communist Party, you couldn't hold certain jobs or participate in the military, even if you were legally an American citizen.

    Replies: @iSteveFan, @Travis

    Agree. While in school during the late 1980s, my school offered a course entitled “Communism: One third of the World”. One third of the world is a much larger proportion than one fifth.

  24. This characterization of Trump’s rhetoric reveals more about the momentum of the conventional wisdom—anything other than Open Borders is Hitlerism—than it does about the candidate.

    It is very characteristic of ideological regimes that are on the ropes that as your position becomes more and more tenuous, you insist on ideological purity even more. If you allow even one whisker of the camel’s nose into your tent then the whole camel may follow, and you can see that the camel is not far away any more but he is right there pushing on your tent flaps . The Inquisition really got going once the position of the church was threatened by the Reformation. The Chinese Communist Party is cracking down on dissent now, because they realize that their legitimacy is in question. They view Gorbachev’s perestroika as an object lesson in what NOT to do.

    So the desperate measures (such as no longer maintaining even a pretense of objectivity in the news pages) are a sign of weakness, not strength.

    • Replies: @res
    @Jack D


    So the desperate measures (such as no longer maintaining even a pretense of objectivity in the news pages) are a sign of weakness, not strength.
     
    Agreed, but perception of weakness combined with residual strength is a dangerous combination. Didn't many of the worst outrages (e.g. your examples) occur in such situations? What is the end game of our establishment's attempt to maintain their narrative?

    On a related note, I worry about how our country would handle a transition to a world where we are not dominant.
    , @whorefinder
    @Jack D

    That gives me hope. However, we must remember that the Inquisition in various countries was largely successful in opposing the Reformation: Italy (there was an Italian inquisition, and Galileo's punishment was part of it), Spain, Portugal, and Latin America remained loyal to the Catholic Church. Furthermore, the earlier Cathar Inquisition destroyed Catharism and removed any hint of non-Catholicism from southern France.

    In short, Inquisitions out of desperation can work-- by ruthlessly purging bad thinkers and by cowing the populace into not daring to question orthodoxy. So gird your loins, boys.

    , @AndrewR
    @Jack D

    >So the desperate measures (such as no longer maintaining even a pretense of objectivity in the news pages) are a sign of weakness, not strength.

    In practice, is there a difference between actions taken out of desperation and actions taken out of total dominance?

    In other words, does an elite that resorts to these desperate measures as a Hail Mary last resort necessarily look different from an elite that resorts to extreme measures due to having complete hegemony and no possibility of being held accountable for their actions?

    Replies: @rod1963

  25. Bravo, Mr. Sailer – a tour de force.

  26. One of the, many, mistakes of the Remain campaign was to launch their fear campaign too early, people started to ignore and then laugh at the threats. I wonder if the media’s stop Trump campaign is making the same mistake. Seem to have been a number of Dem heavy polls (+12, +8) that show Hillary up by many points but re-weighting those show it be still only a few points. If they don’t destroy Trump now then they will only find their attacks are subject to a diminishing marginal returns, if not negative.

    Still I find the lack of alternatives to the left wing media in America very strange. At least in Britain we have a couple of, sometimes, very right wing papers that can counteract the leftist bias of the rest of the media.

    • Replies: @snorlax
    @LondonBob


    One of the, many, mistakes of the Remain campaign was to launch their fear campaign too early, people started to ignore and then laugh at the threats. I wonder if the media’s stop Trump campaign is making the same mistake. Seem to have been a number of Dem heavy polls (+12, +8) that show Hillary up by many points but re-weighting those show it be still only a few points. If they don’t destroy Trump now then they will only find their attacks are subject to a diminishing marginal returns, if not negative.

    Still I find the lack of alternatives to the left wing media in America very strange. At least in Britain we have a couple of, sometimes, very right wing papers that can counteract the leftist bias of the rest of the media.
     
    The difference is that the UK is still ~85% white, while America is now only 60% white. Yes, many more of your whites are deluded Marxists than ours, but ethnicity trumps even ideology when it comes to voting habits, and thus a candidate like Trump can hardly afford to have *any* defections from right-of-center or even centrist whites, and still have a chance of winning.

    So in America a "Project Fear" only needs to convince a small minority of persuadable voters to make a Trump victory impossible — it doesn't matter if it generates a backlash amongst other voters, because Trump needs to win basically all the persuadable voters. (Huge Republican landslides like 1980 and 1988 would have been Democrat victories with today's demographics).

    And yes, our media is far more monolithic, far more leftist, far more influential that yours. It's the most sophisticated, far-reaching, powerful propaganda apparatus in history. After 9/11, Americans' views towards Islam became more favorable. I'm not talking about polls taken years later — like November of 2001.
    , @snorlax
    @LondonBob

    I'll add that you shouldn't count your chickens before they hatch, re: Brexit.

    , @Anon
    @LondonBob

    The American media is leftist because of Nixon. The left-wing media were deified during the Nixonian era, and this inspired a whole generation of hardcore leftists to enter the reporting field. For a while, they were held in check by the rule of the centrist Greatest Generation guys who were their bosses (being an eyewitness to Stalin, Mao, and Hitler at their most extreme tended to make you a very determined centrist because it was the only sane spot left), but then all the GG guys started retiring and dying off in the late 80s and 90s. After that, the lefties inherited the top jobs in the media by sheer force of numbers.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

  27. res says:
    @Jack D

    This characterization of Trump’s rhetoric reveals more about the momentum of the conventional wisdom—anything other than Open Borders is Hitlerism—than it does about the candidate.

     

    It is very characteristic of ideological regimes that are on the ropes that as your position becomes more and more tenuous, you insist on ideological purity even more. If you allow even one whisker of the camel's nose into your tent then the whole camel may follow, and you can see that the camel is not far away any more but he is right there pushing on your tent flaps . The Inquisition really got going once the position of the church was threatened by the Reformation. The Chinese Communist Party is cracking down on dissent now, because they realize that their legitimacy is in question. They view Gorbachev's perestroika as an object lesson in what NOT to do.

    So the desperate measures (such as no longer maintaining even a pretense of objectivity in the news pages) are a sign of weakness, not strength.

    Replies: @res, @whorefinder, @AndrewR

    So the desperate measures (such as no longer maintaining even a pretense of objectivity in the news pages) are a sign of weakness, not strength.

    Agreed, but perception of weakness combined with residual strength is a dangerous combination. Didn’t many of the worst outrages (e.g. your examples) occur in such situations? What is the end game of our establishment’s attempt to maintain their narrative?

    On a related note, I worry about how our country would handle a transition to a world where we are not dominant.

  28. Support for Trump is support for an unfit racist moron

    http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/leonard-pitts-jr/article83792282.html

    “This is not about ideology. No, this is about the mainstreaming and normalizing of hatred in ways not seen for over 50 years. It is about how people deserve to be treated, about whether we are a country where the exclusion and even execution of vulnerable peoples are bandied casually about from platforms of authority or whether we are a country with the courage of its convictions.

    I don’t expect much from a mass murderer. But you’d like to think you can hope for a little — I don’t know — grace, dignity, statesmanship from a preacher and a would-be president.”

    • Replies: @Jeff
    @Tiny Duck

    So Trump, and the rest of us, shouldn't hate a mass murderer? And we shouldn't question the government policies that enabled this situation in the first place?

    And we should ignore religion, even when that religion espouses violence?

    How far should we bury our heads in the sand?

    I'm not on board with any of that, sorry.

  29. @Lot
    I followed your link in the article to The New Colossus, and was reminded that it is a remarkably beautiful poem. Circa 1883, when it was written, its sentiments were quite correct.

    Nobody writes this well anymore:

    Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
    With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
    Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
    A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
    Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
    Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
    The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

    "Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
    With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
     

    Replies: @vinteuil, @Anonymous, @Big Bill, @SPMoore8, @PiltdownMan, @boogerbently, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Kylie, @Njguy73, @SFG, @Olorin

    Thumbs down on the Lazarus poem. You’d have to read some Tennyson or Browning to see how bad her poetic skills actually were for her time. Furthermore, as an attempt to write what amounts to an Elizabethan era sonnet, it literally groans under the weight of its own storied pomp. I’ll grant that the last five lines are pretty memorable, or maybe it’s just because I have heard them so many times.

    • Replies: @Lot
    @SPMoore8

    I've read plenty of both and it stands with them. Obviously the public thought so as it is very well liked.

    It is very well rhymed, metered, and alliterated. I like

    astride from land to land;

    sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand

    whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning
    her name
    Mother of Exiles.

    world-wide welcome;

    wretched refuse ... teeming tempest-tost to me,

    lift my lamp

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @SPMoore8, @Chrisnonymous

  30. @Jack D

    This characterization of Trump’s rhetoric reveals more about the momentum of the conventional wisdom—anything other than Open Borders is Hitlerism—than it does about the candidate.

     

    It is very characteristic of ideological regimes that are on the ropes that as your position becomes more and more tenuous, you insist on ideological purity even more. If you allow even one whisker of the camel's nose into your tent then the whole camel may follow, and you can see that the camel is not far away any more but he is right there pushing on your tent flaps . The Inquisition really got going once the position of the church was threatened by the Reformation. The Chinese Communist Party is cracking down on dissent now, because they realize that their legitimacy is in question. They view Gorbachev's perestroika as an object lesson in what NOT to do.

    So the desperate measures (such as no longer maintaining even a pretense of objectivity in the news pages) are a sign of weakness, not strength.

    Replies: @res, @whorefinder, @AndrewR

    That gives me hope. However, we must remember that the Inquisition in various countries was largely successful in opposing the Reformation: Italy (there was an Italian inquisition, and Galileo’s punishment was part of it), Spain, Portugal, and Latin America remained loyal to the Catholic Church. Furthermore, the earlier Cathar Inquisition destroyed Catharism and removed any hint of non-Catholicism from southern France.

    In short, Inquisitions out of desperation can work– by ruthlessly purging bad thinkers and by cowing the populace into not daring to question orthodoxy. So gird your loins, boys.

  31. I read a really good article on troll tactics to D&C over at TheRightStuff this morning. Complete with may-mays to download and screenshots of the tactics in action.

    http://therightstuff.biz/2016/06/14/wedging-gays-and-muslims/

  32. @Jack D
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Emma Lazarus's ancestors arrived in the US before the American Revolution, probably before yours did.

    Replies: @AlphaSupremo, @SPMoore8, @Dirk Dagger, @iSteveFan, @woodNfish, @tbraton, @Yo Trump, @Chris Mallory, @Buzz Mohawk, @AnotherDad

    You are right about Emma’s ancestors but your OP is also right that the poem was likely motivated by her solicitude for Russian Jews fleeing persecution during this time (1883). Moreover, the poem was in fact put onto the statue 20 years later.

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

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @SPMoore8

    What does that have to do with whether she is "American" or not? Did WASP-Americans lose their status as "Americans" because they had solicitude for the British who were being blitzed by the Germans?

    Replies: @SPMoore8

  33. Dirk Dagger [AKA "Chico Caldera"] says:
    @Jack D
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Emma Lazarus's ancestors arrived in the US before the American Revolution, probably before yours did.

    Replies: @AlphaSupremo, @SPMoore8, @Dirk Dagger, @iSteveFan, @woodNfish, @tbraton, @Yo Trump, @Chris Mallory, @Buzz Mohawk, @AnotherDad

    Wasn’t Mohawks here first?

  34. “…[the craven press say] if we don’t roll over and let in more Muslim immigrants, then the ones who are here already will get really mad and kill us all for sure.”

    Absolutely. My idea is that it’s like traffic deaths. We’re used to 3,000 deaths per month, it’s not even news, and in exchange we can all drive whatever vehicles wherever and whenever we want. Occasional mass shootings by Muslim killers is the price for our pride in cultural diversity, good middle eastern food and all the good feelings from opening our arms wide to the world.

    The sooner we start saying “Nothing to see here, move along” the quicker we can all get back to our usual pursuits.

  35. @Mark Caplan
    Liberals declare, as though a self-evident truth: "We can't go to war with the world's 1.6 billion Muslims." Why not? For decades we were at war with that other ideology bent on world domination, communism. Roughly the same number of people were communists in the 1950s as are Muslims today. (Tally up the populations of Red China, the USSR, North Vietnam, North Korea, Cuba, and so on.) We had a sign at the border, too: "Commies Keep Out!" We had in effect a religious test based on your beliefs: If you served the Communist Party, you couldn't hold certain jobs or participate in the military, even if you were legally an American citizen.

    Replies: @iSteveFan, @Travis

    we still have restrictions to prevent National Socialists or any former members from entering the United States. The U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act still makes ineligible for permanent residence a person who “is or has been a member of or affiliated with the Communist Party”.

    all travelers into the US must answer the following question today before being admitted.
    Have you ever Been a member of or affiliated with the Communist Party or Nazi government of Germany ?

    it is clear we could follow the Jimmy Carter example and deny entry to all aliens from Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia etc…with an exception for Christians who face persecution in these nations.

  36. @Jack D
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Emma Lazarus's ancestors arrived in the US before the American Revolution, probably before yours did.

    Replies: @AlphaSupremo, @SPMoore8, @Dirk Dagger, @iSteveFan, @woodNfish, @tbraton, @Yo Trump, @Chris Mallory, @Buzz Mohawk, @AnotherDad

    Do you consider her founding stock?

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @iSteveFan

    I don't see why not. There's no "official" definition of founding stock, but the Founding Fathers themselves did not impose any religious tests in the Constitution or the Declaration. The idea that to be a "real" American you had to be of white Anglo-Saxon Protestant stock was retconned into American history in the late 19th century when lots of immigrants started showing up.

    Replies: @Yo Trump, @Big Bill, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Crawfurdmuir, @Jenner Ickham Errican

  37. The Democrats, Oligarchs and the media have demonstrated the fear they have of a Trump Presidency. The focus has been more Anti-Trump since the terrorist attack than ever before.

    If muslim immigrants benefit Americans, why has the current administration stopped 98% of muslims who wanted to immigrate from entering our borders. Over the last 8 years 100 million would have immigrated if we allowed them to come. Even Obama was not foolish enough to accept more than 2% of the potential muslim immigrants.

    It seems to media and politicians fail to mention this fact. Do the American people realize that hundreds of millions of Muslims would immigrate if given the opportunity. Hillary needs to answer the question, how many muslims should we accept into our nation over the next 4 years ? President Obama accepted 4 million. Should we increase it to 5 million or reduce it to less than 1 million. why have a visa lottery in Muslim nations when most Western nations are denied this opportunity ?

    • Replies: @Honorary Thief
    @Travis

    I hope this becomes a popular line of discussion on the Alt-Right. It would be devestating if Trump used it on Hillary.

  38. This is a particularly good column, Steve, nicely tying a bunch of key things together.

  39. @Tiny Duck
    So what's the endgame?

    It seems that the argument is that heterosexual white male Christians (and the women they have convinced to love them) are the problem.

    If this group was eliminated would the world be a better place?

    Replies: @Thea, @Jeff

    No this group needs to stick around. Opposition to white Christian men is the only unifying force they have.

  40. Personally, I’ve been to Trump Tower, and I’d guess that the GOP candidate employed more than a few gay men to decorate it.

    Hear you on that! BTW NY Magazine used to cover these lurid, technicolor blood spattered, high class gay on gay love spats turned into murders but stopped maybe 25 years ago.

  41. The New York Times has become unhinged over Trump and has cast aside all pretense of objectivity in its news articles. I really ought to cancel my subscription.

    • Replies: @res
    @Flip


    The New York Times has become unhinged over Trump and has cast aside all pretense of objectivity in its news articles. I really ought to cancel my subscription.
     
    I saw the article below and was wondering what kind of methodology they used to determine that NYT coverage of Trump has been positive or neutral 63% of the time (73% for Fox):
    http://usuncut.com/politics/harvard-study-media-primaries/
    Perhaps they started by ignoring the opinion pages?
    More detailed article at http://shorensteincenter.org/pre-primary-news-coverage-2016-trump-clinton-sanders/

    I am fascinated at how the strident attempts to take Trump down using the media have been retconned into being a positive for him. Yes, he got a huge boost from media exposure, but most of that was his being entertaining in the debates and the media trying to demonize him (and failing to a large extent).
  42. @iSteveFan
    @Jack D

    Do you consider her founding stock?

    Replies: @Jack D

    I don’t see why not. There’s no “official” definition of founding stock, but the Founding Fathers themselves did not impose any religious tests in the Constitution or the Declaration. The idea that to be a “real” American you had to be of white Anglo-Saxon Protestant stock was retconned into American history in the late 19th century when lots of immigrants started showing up.

    • Replies: @Yo Trump
    @Jack D

    The question is, did her founding stock family have a secret relationship with mine?

    , @Big Bill
    @Jack D

    Wasn't the late 19th Century the same time that America was retconned into being a "proposition nation" and a "nation of immigrants"?

    Don't get me wrong. I am sure Emma was a very nice lady, and she wrote a nice poem. I respect her devout race loyalty as well. We should all be as loyal to our own people as she was to hers.

    , @Hippopotamusdrome
    @Jack D



    The idea that to be a “real” American you had to be of white Anglo-Saxon Protestant stock was retconned into American history

     

    At the very least white, because they still had negro slavery then.
    , @Crawfurdmuir
    @Jack D


    The idea that to be a “real” American you had to be of white Anglo-Saxon Protestant stock was retconned into American history in the late 19th century when lots of immigrants started showing up.
     
    John Jay wrote in Federalist No. 2:

    "Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people--a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty and independence."

    He seemed to think there was a "founding stock" - to whom was he referring?

    Replies: @Flip

    , @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @Jack D

    You seem to be confusing the term “founding stock” with later, more inclusive definitions of “American.” The can be only a certain people, at a certain time, who are founders. It just so happens that Jews were an infinitesimal number in the sea of transplanted Britons who did the work of conquering, settling, and conceiving the principles of what was to become a New Nation. So to call Lazarus founding stock is as deceptive as calling aboriginal allies of the Colonists “founding stock.”

    That’s not to say some Jews (and Indians) didn’t contribute “bigly” to the Revolutionary cause, of course. It’s too bad Emma the poetess didn’t much appreciate the existing folks she lived amongst to the point of calling for wretched refuse to crowd the City upon a Hill.

  43. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Personally, I’ve been to Trump Tower, and I’d guess that the GOP candidate employed more than a few gay men to decorate it.

    Right, even Liberace had an apartment in Trump Tower. Trump Tower’s decor in general is similar to Liberace’s house in Las Vegas. It’s got that 70s/80s gay tackiness vibe.

  44. @Jack D
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Emma Lazarus's ancestors arrived in the US before the American Revolution, probably before yours did.

    Replies: @AlphaSupremo, @SPMoore8, @Dirk Dagger, @iSteveFan, @woodNfish, @tbraton, @Yo Trump, @Chris Mallory, @Buzz Mohawk, @AnotherDad

    Your response has nothing to do with the fact that the poem sucks and is complete bullshit. Some people probably think it is part of the constitution. Maybe you do too.

  45. @SPMoore8
    @Jack D

    You are right about Emma's ancestors but your OP is also right that the poem was likely motivated by her solicitude for Russian Jews fleeing persecution during this time (1883). Moreover, the poem was in fact put onto the statue 20 years later.

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

    Replies: @Jack D

    What does that have to do with whether she is “American” or not? Did WASP-Americans lose their status as “Americans” because they had solicitude for the British who were being blitzed by the Germans?

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    @Jack D

    I did not say that Lazarus was not American: Your OP pointed out that the Statue of Liberty is not about immigration, and I concurred, saying however that the poem was, and was attached ~20 years after the statue was erected.

    Everyone knows that American Jews are of two minds about immigration and are generally hesitant to call for restrictions, no matter how conservative or right wing they may be in other respects. The context and genesis of "The New Colossus" helps explain why.

    Replies: @Jack D

  46. @Jack D
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Emma Lazarus's ancestors arrived in the US before the American Revolution, probably before yours did.

    Replies: @AlphaSupremo, @SPMoore8, @Dirk Dagger, @iSteveFan, @woodNfish, @tbraton, @Yo Trump, @Chris Mallory, @Buzz Mohawk, @AnotherDad

    So? That doesn’t undercut the poster’s point in any way.

  47. @Lot
    I followed your link in the article to The New Colossus, and was reminded that it is a remarkably beautiful poem. Circa 1883, when it was written, its sentiments were quite correct.

    Nobody writes this well anymore:

    Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
    With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
    Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
    A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
    Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
    Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
    The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

    "Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
    With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
     

    Replies: @vinteuil, @Anonymous, @Big Bill, @SPMoore8, @PiltdownMan, @boogerbently, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Kylie, @Njguy73, @SFG, @Olorin

    It’s overwrought.

  48. @Jack D
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Emma Lazarus's ancestors arrived in the US before the American Revolution, probably before yours did.

    Replies: @AlphaSupremo, @SPMoore8, @Dirk Dagger, @iSteveFan, @woodNfish, @tbraton, @Yo Trump, @Chris Mallory, @Buzz Mohawk, @AnotherDad

    Well, what she wrote is still self-serving graffiti and slapped on later by a small group of “Americans” to co-opt the statue.

  49. @Jack D
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Emma Lazarus's ancestors arrived in the US before the American Revolution, probably before yours did.

    Replies: @AlphaSupremo, @SPMoore8, @Dirk Dagger, @iSteveFan, @woodNfish, @tbraton, @Yo Trump, @Chris Mallory, @Buzz Mohawk, @AnotherDad

    My ancestors have hers beat by 100 years. She isn’t Founding Stock, but a parasite hanging on the British Protestant nation that my ancestors founded.

  50. @Jack D
    @iSteveFan

    I don't see why not. There's no "official" definition of founding stock, but the Founding Fathers themselves did not impose any religious tests in the Constitution or the Declaration. The idea that to be a "real" American you had to be of white Anglo-Saxon Protestant stock was retconned into American history in the late 19th century when lots of immigrants started showing up.

    Replies: @Yo Trump, @Big Bill, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Crawfurdmuir, @Jenner Ickham Errican

    The question is, did her founding stock family have a secret relationship with mine?

  51. @Jack D
    @SPMoore8

    What does that have to do with whether she is "American" or not? Did WASP-Americans lose their status as "Americans" because they had solicitude for the British who were being blitzed by the Germans?

    Replies: @SPMoore8

    I did not say that Lazarus was not American: Your OP pointed out that the Statue of Liberty is not about immigration, and I concurred, saying however that the poem was, and was attached ~20 years after the statue was erected.

    Everyone knows that American Jews are of two minds about immigration and are generally hesitant to call for restrictions, no matter how conservative or right wing they may be in other respects. The context and genesis of “The New Colossus” helps explain why.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @SPMoore8

    It's impossible to say what all American Jews think. Personally, I wish we could go back in time and save the Jews of Europe so we could have had more Feynmans and Salks, but since that's not really possible, I don't see Mateens and Garcias as equivalent substitutes.

    Replies: @SPMoore8, @Marcus

  52. @SPMoore8
    @Jack D

    I did not say that Lazarus was not American: Your OP pointed out that the Statue of Liberty is not about immigration, and I concurred, saying however that the poem was, and was attached ~20 years after the statue was erected.

    Everyone knows that American Jews are of two minds about immigration and are generally hesitant to call for restrictions, no matter how conservative or right wing they may be in other respects. The context and genesis of "The New Colossus" helps explain why.

    Replies: @Jack D

    It’s impossible to say what all American Jews think. Personally, I wish we could go back in time and save the Jews of Europe so we could have had more Feynmans and Salks, but since that’s not really possible, I don’t see Mateens and Garcias as equivalent substitutes.

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    @Jack D

    Well, I certainly agree that American Jews are all over the map as far as immigration goes. But there is a tendency for even conservative Jews to support it, and there's a history to that; which is all I am saying. I also agree that I would have preferred more Europeans (including Ashkenazim) in America rather than Muslims, Arabs, and Latinos. But, as the current political climate makes clear, I really have no connection to, or influence on, politics in America. I feel like I've been trapped on a particularly unpleasant and grueling amusement park ride.

    , @Marcus
    @Jack D

    And more Marcuses and Freidans: no thanks

  53. @Jack D
    @iSteveFan

    I don't see why not. There's no "official" definition of founding stock, but the Founding Fathers themselves did not impose any religious tests in the Constitution or the Declaration. The idea that to be a "real" American you had to be of white Anglo-Saxon Protestant stock was retconned into American history in the late 19th century when lots of immigrants started showing up.

    Replies: @Yo Trump, @Big Bill, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Crawfurdmuir, @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Wasn’t the late 19th Century the same time that America was retconned into being a “proposition nation” and a “nation of immigrants”?

    Don’t get me wrong. I am sure Emma was a very nice lady, and she wrote a nice poem. I respect her devout race loyalty as well. We should all be as loyal to our own people as she was to hers.

  54. @Jack D
    @SPMoore8

    It's impossible to say what all American Jews think. Personally, I wish we could go back in time and save the Jews of Europe so we could have had more Feynmans and Salks, but since that's not really possible, I don't see Mateens and Garcias as equivalent substitutes.

    Replies: @SPMoore8, @Marcus

    Well, I certainly agree that American Jews are all over the map as far as immigration goes. But there is a tendency for even conservative Jews to support it, and there’s a history to that; which is all I am saying. I also agree that I would have preferred more Europeans (including Ashkenazim) in America rather than Muslims, Arabs, and Latinos. But, as the current political climate makes clear, I really have no connection to, or influence on, politics in America. I feel like I’ve been trapped on a particularly unpleasant and grueling amusement park ride.

  55. Hmmm, so on Lazarus’ mother’s side they were from Portugal and in America before the Revolution. I wonder, what line of business might they have been in?

    In 1738 (age 30) (the year of his father’s death) Isaac, hoping to profit from Caribbean trade, set sail for the West Indies. According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, Isaac came to the U.S. via Barbados, settling in NY. During the Revolution, the Seixas clan fled from the British in NY (1776) and settled in Stratford, CT. Isaac later moved to Newport, RI.

    Hmmm, Newport. Newport. What used to happen in Newport? I can’t remember.

    At any rate, her insipid poem may not be the worst poem ever written, but it’s the landslide winner for “Most Destructive Poem Ever Written.”

    • Agree: ben tillman
    • Replies: @check ur priv
    @peterike

    Hmm, seems like they were involved in the slave trade.

    , @Brutusale
    @peterike

    What happened in Newport doesn't really matter. What happened in Roger Williams' Rhode Island, however, was being pretty much the only colony with freedom of religion. It would naturally be the landing point for a Jew.

    Replies: @ben tillman

    , @gbloco
    @peterike

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

  56. @Jack D
    @iSteveFan

    I don't see why not. There's no "official" definition of founding stock, but the Founding Fathers themselves did not impose any religious tests in the Constitution or the Declaration. The idea that to be a "real" American you had to be of white Anglo-Saxon Protestant stock was retconned into American history in the late 19th century when lots of immigrants started showing up.

    Replies: @Yo Trump, @Big Bill, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Crawfurdmuir, @Jenner Ickham Errican

    The idea that to be a “real” American you had to be of white Anglo-Saxon Protestant stock was retconned into American history

    At the very least white, because they still had negro slavery then.

  57. Speaking of Donald Trump, Andy Warhol said ‘he’s a butch guy”.

  58. @Lot
    I followed your link in the article to The New Colossus, and was reminded that it is a remarkably beautiful poem. Circa 1883, when it was written, its sentiments were quite correct.

    Nobody writes this well anymore:

    Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
    With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
    Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
    A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
    Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
    Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
    The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

    "Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
    With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
     

    Replies: @vinteuil, @Anonymous, @Big Bill, @SPMoore8, @PiltdownMan, @boogerbently, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Kylie, @Njguy73, @SFG, @Olorin

    From Wiki:

    Lazarus was born into a large Sephardic-Ashkenazi Jewish family, the fourth of seven children of Moses Lazarus and Esther Nathan,[3] The Lazarus family was from Germany….

    Suspicions confirmed.

  59. @Lot
    I followed your link in the article to The New Colossus, and was reminded that it is a remarkably beautiful poem. Circa 1883, when it was written, its sentiments were quite correct.

    Nobody writes this well anymore:

    Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
    With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
    Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
    A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
    Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
    Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
    The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

    "Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
    With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
     

    Replies: @vinteuil, @Anonymous, @Big Bill, @SPMoore8, @PiltdownMan, @boogerbently, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Kylie, @Njguy73, @SFG, @Olorin

    I especially like the ‘wretched refuse’ part.

    • Replies: @candid_observer
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    Yeah, "wretched refuse". What a recommendation. Imagine how convincing you'd find it in a review on Yelp.

    But Maudlin is as Maudlin does.

    Wasn't it Steven Pinker who said that what we all seem to want in our science and politics is Schmaltz?

    Emma Lazarus was The Maestro.

  60. @Jack D
    @SPMoore8

    It's impossible to say what all American Jews think. Personally, I wish we could go back in time and save the Jews of Europe so we could have had more Feynmans and Salks, but since that's not really possible, I don't see Mateens and Garcias as equivalent substitutes.

    Replies: @SPMoore8, @Marcus

    And more Marcuses and Freidans: no thanks

  61. By my reading, until Muslims turn their gun sites from the unwashed masses to the folks in real positions of power, we shouldn’t expect any changes to Invade/Invite.

    Like H1b’s and illegal immigration, which doesn’t directly threaten the Beltway crowd’s wages, indeed they stand to benefit, they don’t care.

  62. t says:

    OT: Pastor refuses to mourn Orlando victims: ‘The tragedy is that more of them didn’t die’ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/06/14/pastor-refuses-to-mourn-orlando-victims-the-tragedy-is-that-more-of-them-didnt-die/

    Who is this redneck?

    http://www.veritybaptist.com/pastor.html

    Pastor Roger Jimenez was born in Venezuela. His family came to Christ through the influence of American missionaries. He was led to the Lord by his father when he was 4 years old. His family moved to the United States when he was very young.

    Joann Jimenez was born in Northern California. At the age of 17 she was working full time and attending a local community college near Sacramento. The influence at this college had convinced her to be an atheist, even though she was raised somewhat catholic. Joann was saved when a Christian teenage boy, who had recently started working with her, began to present the gospel to her. After months of conversations and debating, late one night while closing, Joann decided to reject atheism and accepted the Lord Jesus Christ as her personal saviour! She immediately began to go to church with her Christian co-worker, got baptized and began to grow in her walk with God. Joann would later marry the young Christian co-worker that presented the gospel to her.

    Roger and Joann Jimenez have been happily married since June of 2004. The Lord has blessed them with wonderful children and they are praying that God will give them many more.

    • Replies: @Discard
    @t

    I don't mourn them either. This public "grief" is just political theater.

    Replies: @AnotherDad

  63. @Lot
    I followed your link in the article to The New Colossus, and was reminded that it is a remarkably beautiful poem. Circa 1883, when it was written, its sentiments were quite correct.

    Nobody writes this well anymore:

    Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
    With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
    Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
    A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
    Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
    Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
    The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

    "Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
    With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
     

    Replies: @vinteuil, @Anonymous, @Big Bill, @SPMoore8, @PiltdownMan, @boogerbently, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Kylie, @Njguy73, @SFG, @Olorin

    “I followed your link in the article to The New Colossus, and was reminded that it is a remarkably beautiful poem. Circa 1883, when it was written, its sentiments were quite correct.”

    Are you kidding no question mark. The poem is overwritten, overwrought and worst of all, overexposed. Its sentiments were never correct. True liberty carries with it responsibility and much of the world’s population, however wretched, is simply unable to cope with it.

    “Nobody writes this well anymore.”

    Enoch Powell wrote far, far better than that. I will never forget the shock of reading his libelously misnamed “Rivers of Blood” speech. I was overwhelmed with the clarity of his thoughts and the beauty of their expression.

    • Replies: @yaqub the mad scientist
    @Kylie

    Funny how in this mass killings of gays you mention the very British politician who introduced the first LGBT rights law in the Anglosphere- not that his opponents will ever give him credit for it.

    , @Dave Pinsen
    @Kylie

    Viktor Frankl, or (((Viktor Frankl))), to save you the Wikipedia search, suggested a Statue of Responsibility be built on the West Coast.

    The poem is both florid and well-written. Sure, it sounds cliched now, but that inevitably comes when something is quoted or referred to so many times.

    Replies: @Kylie, @guest

    , @Lot
    @Kylie

    I agree that Powell's Rivers of Blood speech was extremely good. It was also 5 decades ago by a man with the sort of classical education elites no longer receive except for the less than 1 in 1000 who get a graduate degree in classics or ancient history.

    It makes me sad to think the West no longer has any men of such caliber.

    http://www.vdare.com/articles/like-the-roman-i-seem-to-see-the-river-tiber-foaming-with-much-blood

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

    Replies: @MC, @Kylie, @Clyde, @PiltdownMan

    , @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @Kylie


    Enoch Powell wrote far, far better than that. I will never forget the shock of reading his libelously misnamed “Rivers of Blood” speech.
     
    Powell’s enemies may have meant to lambaste, but the summation is a pithy warning of what’s at stake, particularly to the commoner who might not be inclined to read (or find) a transcript of his speech.

    The (Heartiste) summation du jour: Diversity + Proximity = War

    It seems the recurring “Trump’s Luck” headlines are proving this to be true.
  64. @Kylie
    @Lot

    "I followed your link in the article to The New Colossus, and was reminded that it is a remarkably beautiful poem. Circa 1883, when it was written, its sentiments were quite correct."

    Are you kidding no question mark. The poem is overwritten, overwrought and worst of all, overexposed. Its sentiments were never correct. True liberty carries with it responsibility and much of the world's population, however wretched, is simply unable to cope with it.

    "Nobody writes this well anymore."

    Enoch Powell wrote far, far better than that. I will never forget the shock of reading his libelously misnamed "Rivers of Blood" speech. I was overwhelmed with the clarity of his thoughts and the beauty of their expression.

    Replies: @yaqub the mad scientist, @Dave Pinsen, @Lot, @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Funny how in this mass killings of gays you mention the very British politician who introduced the first LGBT rights law in the Anglosphere- not that his opponents will ever give him credit for it.

  65. res says:
    @Flip
    The New York Times has become unhinged over Trump and has cast aside all pretense of objectivity in its news articles. I really ought to cancel my subscription.

    Replies: @res

    The New York Times has become unhinged over Trump and has cast aside all pretense of objectivity in its news articles. I really ought to cancel my subscription.

    I saw the article below and was wondering what kind of methodology they used to determine that NYT coverage of Trump has been positive or neutral 63% of the time (73% for Fox):
    http://usuncut.com/politics/harvard-study-media-primaries/
    Perhaps they started by ignoring the opinion pages?
    More detailed article at http://shorensteincenter.org/pre-primary-news-coverage-2016-trump-clinton-sanders/

    I am fascinated at how the strident attempts to take Trump down using the media have been retconned into being a positive for him. Yes, he got a huge boost from media exposure, but most of that was his being entertaining in the debates and the media trying to demonize him (and failing to a large extent).

  66. @Hippopotamusdrome
    @Lot

    I especially like the 'wretched refuse' part.

    Replies: @candid_observer

    Yeah, “wretched refuse”. What a recommendation. Imagine how convincing you’d find it in a review on Yelp.

    But Maudlin is as Maudlin does.

    Wasn’t it Steven Pinker who said that what we all seem to want in our science and politics is Schmaltz?

    Emma Lazarus was The Maestro.

  67. OT, sort of, but now Trump is proposing that guns not be sold to those on various terrorist watchlists:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/16/us/politics/donald-trump-gun-control-nra.html

    I had the other day suggested, tongue in cheek, a law that would ban Muslims from having access to guns. Trump’s serious proposal — which is probably a good one, properly implemented — has something of the same effect. It also demonstrates Trump’s basic pragmatism, and ability to change his mind in the face of new facts, when it comes to dealing with problems.

    Of course, Muslims will disproportionately be affected by such a ban.

    So how long before it is denounced as racist?

  68. @Jimi Shmendrix
    Fancy how you managed to peg Emma Lazarus as a "Zionist" inasmuch as she died a decade before the Zionist movement was founded. Why not just say "Jew"? That is, of course, what you mean.

    Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky, @1stTimeCallerLongTimeListener, @check ur priv, @ben tillman, @peterike

    “Fancy how you managed to peg Emma Lazarus as a “Zionist” inasmuch as she died a decade before the Zionist movement was founded. Why not just say “Jew”? That is, of course, what you mean.”

    Sorry bubbele, but according to the article below on the World Zionist Organization website, she was an advocate for a Jewish state, so Steve’s characterization is fair. Steve’s description of her as a Zionist had the effect in my mind of highlighting her monumental hypocrisy (i.e., Jews get their own state, while the American goyim must accept as potential citizens whatever dreck manages to wash up on their shores [and this as a moral imperative, per her loathsome poem]).

    http://www.wzo.org.il/index.php?dir=site&page=articles&op=item&cs=3318&langpage=heb&category=3040&language=eng

    • Replies: @Bee
    @fredyetagain aka superhonky

    "Steve’s description of her as a Zionist had the effect in my mind of highlighting her monumental hypocrisy (i.e., Jews get their own state"

    Nope, she wasn't a hypocrite. Jews are an ethnicity. "Americans" are not and never have been an ethnic group. Why do Americans deserve their own country? Unless you mean indigenous Americans (no, not Ann Coulter).

    On the other hand, the English, Irish, Scottish, Dutch, Italian, Latvians, etc. do have their own countries. And in all of those countries, those ethnic groups still do make up a higher percentage of the population than Jews do in Israel (76% of Israel is Jewish).

    Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky

    , @Bee
    @fredyetagain aka superhonky

    BTW, that comment was not in support of more immigration. It was simply against the ludicrous idea that Lazarus was a hypocrite because "White Christian Americans are an ethnic group just like Jews".

  69. So last night an alligator snatched a two-year-old boy wading in a foot of water at Disney World’s Seven Seas Lagoon. His mother and father couldn’t pry him from the gator’s jaws as he was dragged underwater. The cops are “hopeful” that they’ll find his body.

    But we can all breathe a sigh of relief that at least the alligator is all right. We can all be thankful that the racist cops didn’t shoot him, can’t we? Because that would have been a real tragedy.

    Anyone in iSteveland own any Disney stock? How’s it faring this week?

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    @Stan Adams

    Last I heard they have killed half a dozen gators looking for the child inside of one of them. No luck so far, but they have said they are sure that the child is dead, which suggests they found some corporeal evidence. It's a shockingly sad story, and rather unbelievable.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

  70. @Chris Mallory
    @Anonymous

    We can keep the statue. We just need to jackhammer that wretched plaque off the base . The statue stood for 17 years before they added that dreck.

    Replies: @Big Bill

    The Statue was originally in accord with the Founders’ conception of America: a Beacon of light shining out across a dark, savage, barbarian world to be a living example of how they should reform themselves, their nations, their cultures, and their countries.

    America as a Global Inspiration, enlightening others by its living example.

    As Emma’s tribe deconstructed and reconstructed it, the Statue of Liberty became a Beacon shining out to invite all the dark, savage barbarians to abandon their countries, abandon their nations, abandon their cultures, and to come set up their own little colonies in America.

    America as a Global Dump, receiving uncivilized barbarian trash from across the planet.

    • Agree: Realist
  71. @LondonBob
    One of the, many, mistakes of the Remain campaign was to launch their fear campaign too early, people started to ignore and then laugh at the threats. I wonder if the media's stop Trump campaign is making the same mistake. Seem to have been a number of Dem heavy polls (+12, +8) that show Hillary up by many points but re-weighting those show it be still only a few points. If they don't destroy Trump now then they will only find their attacks are subject to a diminishing marginal returns, if not negative.

    Still I find the lack of alternatives to the left wing media in America very strange. At least in Britain we have a couple of, sometimes, very right wing papers that can counteract the leftist bias of the rest of the media.

    Replies: @snorlax, @snorlax, @Anon

    One of the, many, mistakes of the Remain campaign was to launch their fear campaign too early, people started to ignore and then laugh at the threats. I wonder if the media’s stop Trump campaign is making the same mistake. Seem to have been a number of Dem heavy polls (+12, +8) that show Hillary up by many points but re-weighting those show it be still only a few points. If they don’t destroy Trump now then they will only find their attacks are subject to a diminishing marginal returns, if not negative.

    Still I find the lack of alternatives to the left wing media in America very strange. At least in Britain we have a couple of, sometimes, very right wing papers that can counteract the leftist bias of the rest of the media.

    The difference is that the UK is still ~85% white, while America is now only 60% white. Yes, many more of your whites are deluded Marxists than ours, but ethnicity trumps even ideology when it comes to voting habits, and thus a candidate like Trump can hardly afford to have *any* defections from right-of-center or even centrist whites, and still have a chance of winning.

    So in America a “Project Fear” only needs to convince a small minority of persuadable voters to make a Trump victory impossible — it doesn’t matter if it generates a backlash amongst other voters, because Trump needs to win basically all the persuadable voters. (Huge Republican landslides like 1980 and 1988 would have been Democrat victories with today’s demographics).

    And yes, our media is far more monolithic, far more leftist, far more influential that yours. It’s the most sophisticated, far-reaching, powerful propaganda apparatus in history. After 9/11, Americans’ views towards Islam became more favorable. I’m not talking about polls taken years later — like November of 2001.

  72. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Marcus
    @Buzz Mohawk

    The statue represents masonic/enlightenment ideals: dismantle it, I say.

    Replies: @anonymous

    Phooey to what the statue “represents”.

    The armature was Eiffel’s warming-up exercise for his skeletal Tower. Eiffel was one of the world’s great innovators, pioneering the use of cast iron for large substructures–erector set like.

    “The same year Eiffel started work on a system of standardised prefabricated bridges, an idea that was the result of a conversation with the governor of Cochin-China. These used a small number of standard components, all small enough to be readily transportable in areas with poor or non-existent roads, and were joined together using bolts rather than rivets, reducing the need for skilled labour on site” Wiki

  73. @LondonBob
    One of the, many, mistakes of the Remain campaign was to launch their fear campaign too early, people started to ignore and then laugh at the threats. I wonder if the media's stop Trump campaign is making the same mistake. Seem to have been a number of Dem heavy polls (+12, +8) that show Hillary up by many points but re-weighting those show it be still only a few points. If they don't destroy Trump now then they will only find their attacks are subject to a diminishing marginal returns, if not negative.

    Still I find the lack of alternatives to the left wing media in America very strange. At least in Britain we have a couple of, sometimes, very right wing papers that can counteract the leftist bias of the rest of the media.

    Replies: @snorlax, @snorlax, @Anon

    I’ll add that you shouldn’t count your chickens before they hatch, re: Brexit.

  74. Now all the leftists and RINOs are talking up trampling the 2nd Amendment rights of people on the terrorist watch list. Great, yeah, let’s give the federal bureaucrats veto power over everyone’s 2nd Amendment rights. Obama doesn’t need to ban guns, he can just abolish the 2nd Amendment by putting everyone on the terrorist watch list, brilliant.

    Rule of law, due process, human rights, these things mean nothing to gun-grabbers. They want everyone disarmed and unable to defend themselves, ASAP. Or at least, white people and political enemies, anyway.

  75. @Tiny Duck
    So what's the endgame?

    It seems that the argument is that heterosexual white male Christians (and the women they have convinced to love them) are the problem.

    If this group was eliminated would the world be a better place?

    Replies: @Thea, @Jeff

    It’s not that they are to be eliminated, it’s that they’re to be castrated, so to speak. TPTB just need mindless labor.

  76. @Tiny Duck
    Support for Trump is support for an unfit racist moron

    http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/leonard-pitts-jr/article83792282.html




    "This is not about ideology. No, this is about the mainstreaming and normalizing of hatred in ways not seen for over 50 years. It is about how people deserve to be treated, about whether we are a country where the exclusion and even execution of vulnerable peoples are bandied casually about from platforms of authority or whether we are a country with the courage of its convictions.

    I don’t expect much from a mass murderer. But you’d like to think you can hope for a little — I don’t know — grace, dignity, statesmanship from a preacher and a would-be president."

    Replies: @Jeff

    So Trump, and the rest of us, shouldn’t hate a mass murderer? And we shouldn’t question the government policies that enabled this situation in the first place?

    And we should ignore religion, even when that religion espouses violence?

    How far should we bury our heads in the sand?

    I’m not on board with any of that, sorry.

  77. @Jack D
    @iSteveFan

    I don't see why not. There's no "official" definition of founding stock, but the Founding Fathers themselves did not impose any religious tests in the Constitution or the Declaration. The idea that to be a "real" American you had to be of white Anglo-Saxon Protestant stock was retconned into American history in the late 19th century when lots of immigrants started showing up.

    Replies: @Yo Trump, @Big Bill, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Crawfurdmuir, @Jenner Ickham Errican

    The idea that to be a “real” American you had to be of white Anglo-Saxon Protestant stock was retconned into American history in the late 19th century when lots of immigrants started showing up.

    John Jay wrote in Federalist No. 2:

    “Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people–a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty and independence.”

    He seemed to think there was a “founding stock” – to whom was he referring?

    • Replies: @Flip
    @Crawfurdmuir

    Interesting that he was of French and Dutch ancestry rather than English and still felt this way.

    Replies: @Crawfurdmuir, @Discard

  78. @Jimi Shmendrix
    Fancy how you managed to peg Emma Lazarus as a "Zionist" inasmuch as she died a decade before the Zionist movement was founded. Why not just say "Jew"? That is, of course, what you mean.

    Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky, @1stTimeCallerLongTimeListener, @check ur priv, @ben tillman, @peterike

    per Wikipedia: She is an important forerunner of the Zionist movement. She argued for the creation of a Jewish homeland thirteen years before Theodor Herzl began to use the term Zionism.

  79. @Jimi Shmendrix
    Fancy how you managed to peg Emma Lazarus as a "Zionist" inasmuch as she died a decade before the Zionist movement was founded. Why not just say "Jew"? That is, of course, what you mean.

    Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky, @1stTimeCallerLongTimeListener, @check ur priv, @ben tillman, @peterike

    Lazarus express support for a ‘jewish homeland’ before the formal start of the zionist movement.

  80. Or maybe it’s not so much of a nightmare for the establishment after all? The public seems to side with Obama over Trump on the issue by a rather large margin.

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/06/are-democrats-winning-political-battle-over-islamic-terror.php

    Perhaps The Megaphone is invincible after all?

    • Replies: @candid_observer
    @JerryC

    I just about never engage in conspiracy theories, for the very basic reason that they are almost always wrong. But I have to say I'm just not believing that the results of the poll, and the reporting on them, could be close to the truth.

    Look, unbiased polls have shown that most Americans actually have supported Trump's idea of a temporary ban on Muslim immigration (which I honestly have a problem with, if it is an explicit religious test). This was before Orlando.

    After Orlando, the vast majority think his approach is just way wrong? After?

    Something just isn't right about this -- it fails basic sanity checks.

    Replies: @ben tillman, @candid_observer

    , @ben tillman
    @JerryC


    Or maybe it’s not so much of a nightmare for the establishment after all? The public seems to side with Obama over Trump on the issue by a rather large margin.

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/06/are-democrats-winning-political-battle-over-islamic-terror.php

    Perhaps The Megaphone is invincible after all?
     
    Undoubtedly.
    , @Trumpenproleteriat
    @JerryC

    A Reuter's poll says that Trump rebounded on the 12th from a nosedive (following a week of spinning his judge comments) and is now within 8 points of Cankles.
    http://polling.reuters.com/#!poll/TM651Y15_13

    Where is Nate Silver when you need him

  81. @peterike
    Hmmm, so on Lazarus' mother's side they were from Portugal and in America before the Revolution. I wonder, what line of business might they have been in?

    In 1738 (age 30) (the year of his father's death) Isaac, hoping to profit from Caribbean trade, set sail for the West Indies. According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, Isaac came to the U.S. via Barbados, settling in NY. During the Revolution, the Seixas clan fled from the British in NY (1776) and settled in Stratford, CT. Isaac later moved to Newport, RI.

     

    Hmmm, Newport. Newport. What used to happen in Newport? I can't remember.

    At any rate, her insipid poem may not be the worst poem ever written, but it's the landslide winner for "Most Destructive Poem Ever Written."

    Replies: @check ur priv, @Brutusale, @gbloco

    Hmm, seems like they were involved in the slave trade.

  82. @Big Bill
    @Lot

    Placing a plaque with Emma's poem on the base of the Statue of Liberty was the single greatest act of Jewish propaganda* in the history of the world.

    The statue, a French gift to the American people, was created to honor our shared Enlightenment values ("the Statue of Liberty Enlightening the World"). The statue took years to build with donations from hundreds of thousands of Americans and Frenchmen. It stands 305 feet tall and weighs 450,000 pounds.

    Yet it was converted into a monument for open borders and free Jewish immigration to the USA by the addition of a 500 pound plaque with Emma Lazarus's words.

    500 pounds versus 450,000 pounds. That, my friends, is 1000-to-1 leverage. A brilliant propaganda coup.

    Imagine you could put your own personal bronze plaque on statues, bridges, office buildings, dams, sculptures and paintings, explaining the "real meaning" and "true significance" of all of them.

    Imagine that tens of thousands of children and adults would be brought to read your plaque every year, to gaze upward and to reflect with awe and dedication on the importance of your words.

    Imagine that the entire country would, over time, commit itself to the principles you expressed.

    What a propaganda coup! Absolutely brilliant.

    * it was so powerful that Eddie Bernays (author of "Propaganda") leveraged the Statue of Liberty in his "Torches of Freedom" cigarette propaganda campaign in the 1929 NYC Easter Parade.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    Even without the poem, it’s likely the statue would have gained an association with immigration anyway, given its proximity to Ellis Island.

    If the statue were erected on the mall in D.C., maybe not.

    • Replies: @1stTimeCallerLongTimeListener
    @Dave Pinsen

    At least we wouldn't have the words "wretched refuse" associated with the zeroth amendment.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen

  83. @Kylie
    @Lot

    "I followed your link in the article to The New Colossus, and was reminded that it is a remarkably beautiful poem. Circa 1883, when it was written, its sentiments were quite correct."

    Are you kidding no question mark. The poem is overwritten, overwrought and worst of all, overexposed. Its sentiments were never correct. True liberty carries with it responsibility and much of the world's population, however wretched, is simply unable to cope with it.

    "Nobody writes this well anymore."

    Enoch Powell wrote far, far better than that. I will never forget the shock of reading his libelously misnamed "Rivers of Blood" speech. I was overwhelmed with the clarity of his thoughts and the beauty of their expression.

    Replies: @yaqub the mad scientist, @Dave Pinsen, @Lot, @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Viktor Frankl, or (((Viktor Frankl))), to save you the Wikipedia search, suggested a Statue of Responsibility be built on the West Coast.

    The poem is both florid and well-written. Sure, it sounds cliched now, but that inevitably comes when something is quoted or referred to so many times.

    • Replies: @Kylie
    @Dave Pinsen

    "The poem is both florid and well-written. Sure, it sounds cliched now, but that inevitably comes when something is quoted or referred to so many times."

    Nope. Poems can be both florid and well-written. But not this one. Quite apart from its ideological slant, it simply isn't very good literature. It's on par with Browning's early piece, "Love Among the Ruins", which has an unfortunately risible rhyme scheme.

    And while enough repetitions ensure that even a great poem loses its freshness, that loss is always temporary. You need only leave the poem for a while and then come back to it to realize its greatness afresh. To test my assertion, I just reread "Adlestrop", after maybe a year's absence. As always, the stanza beginning "And for that minute a blackbird sang..." gave me the marvelous feeling that the whole poem was about to take wing. That is true greatness.

    , @guest
    @Dave Pinsen

    Only a small part of it is quoted endlessly. We're not confronted with a "familiarity breeds contempt" situation here, like with the Mona Lisa. The less known part isn't better. There are a lot of florid poems that're actually good; go read some of the so-called metaphysical poets, for instance.

  84. @Dave Pinsen
    @Big Bill

    Even without the poem, it's likely the statue would have gained an association with immigration anyway, given its proximity to Ellis Island.

    If the statue were erected on the mall in D.C., maybe not.

    Replies: @1stTimeCallerLongTimeListener

    At least we wouldn’t have the words “wretched refuse” associated with the zeroth amendment.

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    @1stTimeCallerLongTimeListener

    Yeah, the "wretched refuse" line sticks out. It brings to mind a garbage-strewn beach. Maybe it sounded different to 19th Century ears. I assume she was making an ironic point: "You think your people are garbage, but we'll take them and prove you wrong".

    Of course, it's worth remembering how different things were during the Ellis Island era of immigration. For one thing, the selection criteria were stricter then than now. We're importing immigrants with tuberculosis now. Ellis Island would have shipped them back.

    Also, there was no government safety net for immigrants back then. Some who couldn't make a go of it, went back to their countries of origin.

    Replies: @iSteveFan

  85. Forgive me for interrupting the standard blood libeling (I sympathize deeply with how Steve relies on them for tipjar income) but Lazarus in 1883 was addressing 19th century European immigration only. That form of immigration – despite the best efforts of many here to alienate the close to 100 million ethnic white Americans who are not ‘founding stock’ Anglo-Saxons – is in many important respects a completely separate issue from modern day non-European immigration.

    Polish, Italian, Greek, and Great Wave descended Irish Americans also find the poem very touching because it was meant as a tribute to them. But there’s little tipjar money to be raised from pointing that out, right Steveo?

    • Replies: @Clyde
    @The Undiscovered Jew


    Lazarus in 1883 was addressing 19th century European immigration only. That form of immigration – despite the best efforts of many here to alienate the close to 100 million ethnic white Americans who are not ‘founding stock’ Anglo-Saxons – is in many important respects a completely separate issue from modern day non-European immigration.
     
    Good point and European immigration was the only kind there was and was the only kind imaginable back then. All changed in the 1965 Immigration Act which also was when Australia abandoned its White Australia immigration policies. Great Britain started admitting colonials. Emma Lazarus' poem was legitimate to put on the Statue of Liberty because America needed more people to labor away and fill this country up. Today we do not need unskilled third worlders, the robots are coming to eliminate jobs, so the plaque should be removed.
    Christian Arabs from the Levant are the only non-Europeans I can think of that were allowed in during the great wave before 1920

    Replies: @SPMoore8, @SFG

    , @Dave Pinsen
    @The Undiscovered Jew


    But there’s little tipjar money to be raised from pointing that out, right Steveo?
     
    It sounds like you're suggesting that Jews don't tip.

    Replies: @Lot, @The Undiscovered Jew

    , @ben tillman
    @The Undiscovered Jew


    Forgive me for interrupting the standard blood libeling (I sympathize deeply with how Steve relies on them for tipjar income) but Lazarus in 1883 was addressing 19th century European immigration only. That form of immigration – despite the best efforts of many here to alienate the close to 100 million ethnic white Americans who are not ‘founding stock’ Anglo-Saxons – is in many important respects a completely separate issue from modern day non-European immigration.
     
    Modern-day non-European immigration is a result of the European immigration you defend.
    , @grmbl
    @The Undiscovered Jew

    What do you want from Steve? Should he apologize? Should he admit that he knew all along that MacDonald is a fraud?

    He can't and won't do that. A big part of iSteve ideology is the idea that Jews have supplanted WASPs as the ruling caste of America, that they are Israel-firsters, that they harm the American people by pushing for more third-world immigration, that they demoralize and depress gentiles for competitive advantage by means of memorializing the Holocaust, and so on and so forth. The Jew as parasite sucking the lifeblood out of the host nation. This draws much of his readership (although he deletes many of their most hateful comments every day.)

    Because Steve's brand of antisemitism is not the torches-and-pitchfork kind, not genocidal, he claims that he is not an antisemite. Ultimately no one can know what he really believes. Maybe it's never been more than a coldly calculated cynical ploy to cultivate some of the fertile ground left untilled by Stormfront.

    Replies: @anon, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @The Undiscovered Jew, @anon

  86. @peterike
    Hmmm, so on Lazarus' mother's side they were from Portugal and in America before the Revolution. I wonder, what line of business might they have been in?

    In 1738 (age 30) (the year of his father's death) Isaac, hoping to profit from Caribbean trade, set sail for the West Indies. According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, Isaac came to the U.S. via Barbados, settling in NY. During the Revolution, the Seixas clan fled from the British in NY (1776) and settled in Stratford, CT. Isaac later moved to Newport, RI.

     

    Hmmm, Newport. Newport. What used to happen in Newport? I can't remember.

    At any rate, her insipid poem may not be the worst poem ever written, but it's the landslide winner for "Most Destructive Poem Ever Written."

    Replies: @check ur priv, @Brutusale, @gbloco

    What happened in Newport doesn’t really matter. What happened in Roger Williams’ Rhode Island, however, was being pretty much the only colony with freedom of religion. It would naturally be the landing point for a Jew.

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    @Brutusale


    What happened in Newport doesn’t really matter. What happened in Roger Williams’ Rhode Island, however, was being pretty much the only colony with freedom of religion. It would naturally be the landing point for a Jew.
     
    Funny, then, that so many chose to go elsewhere.

    Replies: @Brutusale

  87. Placing a plaque with Emma’s poem on the base of the Statue of Liberty was the single greatest act of Jewish propaganda* in the history of the world.

    Jews were no more guilty of opening the borders than any other elite gentile American and polls* show a majority or plurality want less immigration.

    About half of all Hispanics are either illegal immigrants or descended from illegal immigrants (their children, amnestied, or legally sponsored by amnestied illegals). There’s no way the authors of the 1965 act would have known how much illegal immigration there would be starting in the Carter administration.

    It also doesn’t make any theoretical sense why ‘diluting the majority’ would be beneficial to Jews. Doing so creates a power vacuum where every ethnic group is fighting for power with every other group, thus making it more likely for Jewish ethnicity to be noticed.

    Immigration also afflicted urban areas where Jews congregate decades before it became noticeable in the heartland. How did turning the few remaining ‘good’ public schools in NYC into Asian ghettos help secular Jews?

    http://cis.org/ReligionAndImmigrationPoll

    In contrast to many religious leaders, most members think immigration is too high.

    Jews: 50 percent said it is too high; 5 percent said is too low; 22 percent just right.

    http://www.jta.org/news/article/2010/10/12/2741253/poll-jewish-support-for-obama-falling

    The survey asked its Jewish respondents: “A new law in Arizona gives police the power to ask people they’ve stopped to verify their residency status. Supporters say this will help crack down on illegal immigration. Opponents say it could violate civil rights and lead to racial profiling. On balance, do you support or oppose this law?”

    The result was a slim majority in favor of the law: 52 percent to 46 percent.

    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome
    @The Undiscovered Jew

    Trump should reallyy win big with that demographic, seeing how he is the only cantidate against mass immigration.

    Replies: @The Undiscovered Jew

  88. @Jack D
    @iSteveFan

    I don't see why not. There's no "official" definition of founding stock, but the Founding Fathers themselves did not impose any religious tests in the Constitution or the Declaration. The idea that to be a "real" American you had to be of white Anglo-Saxon Protestant stock was retconned into American history in the late 19th century when lots of immigrants started showing up.

    Replies: @Yo Trump, @Big Bill, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Crawfurdmuir, @Jenner Ickham Errican

    You seem to be confusing the term “founding stock” with later, more inclusive definitions of “American.” The can be only a certain people, at a certain time, who are founders. It just so happens that Jews were an infinitesimal number in the sea of transplanted Britons who did the work of conquering, settling, and conceiving the principles of what was to become a New Nation. So to call Lazarus founding stock is as deceptive as calling aboriginal allies of the Colonists “founding stock.”

    That’s not to say some Jews (and Indians) didn’t contribute “bigly” to the Revolutionary cause, of course. It’s too bad Emma the poetess didn’t much appreciate the existing folks she lived amongst to the point of calling for wretched refuse to crowd the City upon a Hill.

  89. @Jack D
    @Je Suis Omar Mateen

    Yes, last night 11 out of 10 late night talk show hosts all denounced guns and those dirty NRA no-goodniks who allow us to own guns. Is there like a jornolist II that sends out talking points from the Hillary campaign?

    I get the feeling though that this is starting not to work. Hillary said in 2008 that she had not shattered the (imaginary) glass ceiling but that there were now lots of cracks in it. I get the feeling that there are beginning to be cracks in the Democrat coalition.

    You have to be pretty desperate to try to connect Omar Mateen to the white frat boy "rapist" from Stanford as if nobody is going to notice that there is a little something different about Omar. And while there are lots of low information voters, most people, no matter how stupid, realize on some level that guns do not walk into nightclubs and go on rampages by themselves. And there is the little detail that Omar was a professional security guard and even in most countries where they don't allow ordinary people to have guns, security guards have access to them.

    Besides being an obvious red herring, the anti-gun crowd has to explain how, if we are not going to build a fence (and god forbid we should do such a thing), it is possible to smuggle across 11 million human beings and mucho tons of drugs every year, but there's no way that guns will come across the border once we make them illegal here.

    You can TRY to change the subject but now you have the candidate of one of the two major parties loudly NOTICING and saying the I-word and it's going to be hard to memory hole Omar's pledge of allegiance to the Islamic State and retcon him into a hateful white man like George Zimmerman. Maybe if he had changed his name to Omar Zimmerman?

    You can denounce Trump as a badthinking racis' and try talking about guns instead but he is going to be on the teevee every day at least from now until November so it's not going to be that easy to shut him up like some poor schmuck whom you can force out of his job for having said a bad word. Even Hillary had to (reluctantly) say the I-word in order to avoid being outflanked by Trump or looking like a total fool.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @IBC, @Heretic

    “And while there are lots of low information voters, most people, no matter how stupid, realize on some level that guns do not walk into nightclubs and go on rampages by themselves.”

    Never underestimate the stupidity of American voters.

  90. They have no evidence Jews ethnically benefit from immigration except for MacDonald’s bogus history of immigration lobbying.

    According to Barry Mehler he distorted what his sources said about Jews and immigration lobbying to falsely imply Jews before WWII wanted multicultural immigration (the actual sources say they were limited to helping Jewish refugees escape persecution).

    And there other examples of MacDonald – the only source antisemites have for their interpretation of Jewish immigration lobbying – lying.

    I want an explanation for how this doesn’t qualify as a lie and why Jews should accept MacDonald’s history as anything but a con:

    1) MacDonald refers to a study about authoritarianism among religious groups and claims the results prove Jews are highly authoritarian.

    2) The actual study says Jews tied with Anglicans and Unitarians for being among the least authoritarian of all measured religious groups.

    http://web.archive.org/web/20090411051702/http://www.people.hbs.edu/dlieberman/lieberman.jewsRaceEmpire.pdf

    Kevin MacDonald:

    Altemeyer (1988, 2) defines “right-wing authoritarianism” as involving three central attributes: submission to legitimate authority; aggression toward individuals that is sanctioned by the authorities; adherence to social conventions. Clearly, individuals high on these traits would be ideal members of cohesive human group evolutionary strategies. Indeed, such attributes would define the ideal Jew in traditional societies: submissive to the kehilla authorities, strongly adherent to within – group social conventions such as the observance of Jewish religious law, and characterized by negative attitudes toward gentile society and culture seen as manifestations of an outgroup. Consistent with this formulation, high scorers on the Right-Wing Authoritarianism Scale (RWA) tend to be highly religious; they tend to be the most orthodox members of their denomination; they believe in group cohesiveness, group loyalty, and identify strongly with ingroups

    (Altemeyer 1994, 134; 1996, 84). Without question, traditional Jewish society and contemporary Jewish Orthodox and fundamentalist groups are highly authoritarian by any measure. Indeed, Rubenstein (1996) found that Orthodox Jews were higher on RWA than “traditional Jews,” and both of these groups were higher than secular Jews.59

    The real study:

    [A]re “very accepting” subjects equally authoritarian in all religions? Or do different denominations (as argued earlier) produce different levels of authoritarianism even among the strongly committed? If we examine just those subjects who answered the (0-5) “still accept” question with either a “4” or a “5” (that is, they indicated they “nearly completely” or “completely” accepted the religious beliefs taught them in childhood), who do you think were the most authoritarian of all these “true believers”? Fundamentalists (185.1) and Mennonites (185.3) among the students, Mennonites (202.1) and Fundamentalists (208.5) among the parents. The (rarer) United Church members, Anglicans, and Jews who were just as accepting of their religions scored about 25 points lower. True-believing Catholics and Lutherans lay somewhere in between. 61

    So not only are Jews among the least authoritarian of religious groups, according to Altemeyer highly religious Jews are among the least authoritarian of the highly religious.

    Yet in an awe-inspiring display of sheer gall (dare I say, ‘chutzpah’?), MacDonald takes information Altemeyer has collected from studies of subjects explicitly identified as “White North Americans” and applies it willy-nilly to the Jews whom Altemeyer, working from actual data rather than his own ‘suppositions,’ largely exempts from the discussion. The point is worth emphasizing: these highly ethnocentric, highly authoritarian, highly self-deceptive “people who are highly attracted to cohesive groups,” as MacDonald so guardedly puts it, whom MacDonald adduces as evidence for the self-deceptive tendencies of Jewish “hyper-collectivism,” were in fact members of MacDonald’s own ethnic group. I can think of no other way to describe this conduct than as an act of deliberate fraud.

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    @The Undiscovered Jew


    Jews were no more guilty of opening the borders than any other elite gentile American.
     
    It was a Jewish project. That the Jewish community persuaded or propagandized others to go along with it does not change that fact.
    , @ben tillman
    @The Undiscovered Jew


    They have no evidence Jews ethnically benefit from immigration except for MacDonald’s bogus history of immigration lobbying.

    According to Barry Mehler he distorted what his sources said about Jews and immigration lobbying to falsely imply Jews before WWII wanted multicultural immigration (the actual sources say they were limited to helping Jewish refugees escape persecution).
     
    How about a cite? I can't find anything from Mehler; all I can find are others referring to what he supposedly said about one cite by MacDonald to S.M. Neuringer, and all these references focus on one particular statement by MacDonald in The Culture of Critique about what Neuringer had to say.

    Whatever the merits of Mehler's criticism in that regard might be (although we can't tell since Neuringer's work is not available online), Mehler apparently had no problem with MacDonald's other attributions to Neuringer, such as:

    p. 259 -- "Jews have been "the single most persistent pressure group favoring a liberal immigration policy" in the United States in the entire immigration debate beginning in 1881 (Neuringer 1971, 392-393):


    In undertaking to sway immigration policy in a liberal direction, Jewish spokespersons and organizations demonstrated a degree of energy unsurpassed by any other interested pressure group. mmigration had constituted a prime object of concern for practically every Jewish defense and community relations organization.
     
    p. 261 -- ". . . the [American Jewish] Committee funded pro-immigration groups composed of non-Jews."

    p. 263 -- ". . . the opposition of Jewish organizations to any restrictions on immigration based on race or ethnicity can be traced back to the nineteenth century. Thus in 1882 the Jewish press was unanimous in its condemnation of the Chinese Exclusion Act."

    Replies: @Lot

    , @anon
    @The Undiscovered Jew

    People should google KMac's work on Jewish lobbying for open borders and judge for themselves.

    1) It made perfect sense for Jews to be pro open borders when they didn't have a homeland of their own - it's an act of hostile cultural warfare but borne of a unique situation maybe extenuates it.

    However now they do have a homeland, being pro open borders everywhere except Israel is cultural warfare with no extenuating circumstances.

    2) All the Jews I've ever known were actively open borders (except for Israel).

    3) I've known c. 6 Jews who moved to Japan and all of them are engaged in open borders activities over there also.

    4) Anyone who's spent a long time arguing about immigration online knows who the biggest screechers are.

    5) US msm is swarming with open borders Jewish pundits.

    So i'm going to guess KMac's research on this issue is likely to be correct.

    Replies: @grmbl, @The Undiscovered Jew, @Lot

    , @anon
    @The Undiscovered Jew


    They have no evidence Jews ethnically benefit from immigration
     
    They don't need to benefit - and with the current mass Muslim immigration almost certainly won't - evolved paranoia as a result of 20 centuries as a wandering minority seems like a perfectly plausible explanation.
  91. Why did MacDonald twist histories of pre-WWII Jews helping other Jews escape persecution to imply they were pushing for non-European immigration?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_B._MacDonald#Academic_reception

    For example, Dr. Barry Mehler, an educator at Ferris State University, noted that MacDonald had claimed that “…Jewish opposition to the 1921 and 1924 legislation (to limit immigration) was motivated less by a desire for higher levels of Jewish immigration than by opposition to the implicit theory that America should be dominated by individuals with northern and western European ancestry.” MacDonald based this on a dissertation entitled “American Jewry and United States immigration policy, 1881-1953” by Sheldon Morris Neuringer.[who?] Nueringer’s thesis posited that Jewish opposition in 1921 and 1924 to the anti-immigration legislation at the time was due more to it having the “taint of discrimination and anti-Semitism” as opposed to how it would limit Jewish immigration. Mehler stated “It seems to me Mr. MacDonald is misrepresenting Mr. Neuringer in this case and I posted my query hoping that a historian familiar with the literature might have a judgment on MacDonald’s use of the historical data.” [34]

  92. @Jimi Shmendrix
    Fancy how you managed to peg Emma Lazarus as a "Zionist" inasmuch as she died a decade before the Zionist movement was founded. Why not just say "Jew"? That is, of course, what you mean.

    Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky, @1stTimeCallerLongTimeListener, @check ur priv, @ben tillman, @peterike

    Fancy how you managed to peg Emma Lazarus as a “Zionist” inasmuch as she died a decade before the Zionist movement was founded.

    Thanks for the mendacity. Zionism has been around for centuries.

    • Replies: @Jimi Shmendrix
    @ben tillman

    Don't mention it. If the "Zionism" you refer to is the one mentioned 3 times daily as #10 of the primary 18 prayers, then yes, it's been around for millennia. Because, after all, there's no place like home.

    But that's spiritual Zionism. Political Zionism is no more than 120 years old.

  93. @Jimi Shmendrix
    Fancy how you managed to peg Emma Lazarus as a "Zionist" inasmuch as she died a decade before the Zionist movement was founded. Why not just say "Jew"? That is, of course, what you mean.

    Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky, @1stTimeCallerLongTimeListener, @check ur priv, @ben tillman, @peterike

    Fancy how you managed to peg Emma Lazarus as a “Zionist” inasmuch as she died a decade before the Zionist movement was founded. Why not just say “Jew”? That is, of course, what you mean.

    Facts, dear boy, facts.

    She [Lazarus] is an important forerunner of the Zionist movement. She argued for the creation of a Jewish homeland thirteen years before Theodor Herzl began to use the term Zionism.

  94. @peterike
    Hmmm, so on Lazarus' mother's side they were from Portugal and in America before the Revolution. I wonder, what line of business might they have been in?

    In 1738 (age 30) (the year of his father's death) Isaac, hoping to profit from Caribbean trade, set sail for the West Indies. According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, Isaac came to the U.S. via Barbados, settling in NY. During the Revolution, the Seixas clan fled from the British in NY (1776) and settled in Stratford, CT. Isaac later moved to Newport, RI.

     

    Hmmm, Newport. Newport. What used to happen in Newport? I can't remember.

    At any rate, her insipid poem may not be the worst poem ever written, but it's the landslide winner for "Most Destructive Poem Ever Written."

    Replies: @check ur priv, @Brutusale, @gbloco

  95. @Dave Pinsen
    @Kylie

    Viktor Frankl, or (((Viktor Frankl))), to save you the Wikipedia search, suggested a Statue of Responsibility be built on the West Coast.

    The poem is both florid and well-written. Sure, it sounds cliched now, but that inevitably comes when something is quoted or referred to so many times.

    Replies: @Kylie, @guest

    “The poem is both florid and well-written. Sure, it sounds cliched now, but that inevitably comes when something is quoted or referred to so many times.”

    Nope. Poems can be both florid and well-written. But not this one. Quite apart from its ideological slant, it simply isn’t very good literature. It’s on par with Browning’s early piece, “Love Among the Ruins”, which has an unfortunately risible rhyme scheme.

    And while enough repetitions ensure that even a great poem loses its freshness, that loss is always temporary. You need only leave the poem for a while and then come back to it to realize its greatness afresh. To test my assertion, I just reread “Adlestrop”, after maybe a year’s absence. As always, the stanza beginning “And for that minute a blackbird sang…” gave me the marvelous feeling that the whole poem was about to take wing. That is true greatness.

  96. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @LondonBob
    One of the, many, mistakes of the Remain campaign was to launch their fear campaign too early, people started to ignore and then laugh at the threats. I wonder if the media's stop Trump campaign is making the same mistake. Seem to have been a number of Dem heavy polls (+12, +8) that show Hillary up by many points but re-weighting those show it be still only a few points. If they don't destroy Trump now then they will only find their attacks are subject to a diminishing marginal returns, if not negative.

    Still I find the lack of alternatives to the left wing media in America very strange. At least in Britain we have a couple of, sometimes, very right wing papers that can counteract the leftist bias of the rest of the media.

    Replies: @snorlax, @snorlax, @Anon

    The American media is leftist because of Nixon. The left-wing media were deified during the Nixonian era, and this inspired a whole generation of hardcore leftists to enter the reporting field. For a while, they were held in check by the rule of the centrist Greatest Generation guys who were their bosses (being an eyewitness to Stalin, Mao, and Hitler at their most extreme tended to make you a very determined centrist because it was the only sane spot left), but then all the GG guys started retiring and dying off in the late 80s and 90s. After that, the lefties inherited the top jobs in the media by sheer force of numbers.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @Anon

    Yep, they watched "All The President's Men" and thought, yeah, that's what I wanna do. Screw starting as a police reporter on the Wichita Beacon, I'm gonna go to to J-school!

  97. @Kylie
    @Lot

    "I followed your link in the article to The New Colossus, and was reminded that it is a remarkably beautiful poem. Circa 1883, when it was written, its sentiments were quite correct."

    Are you kidding no question mark. The poem is overwritten, overwrought and worst of all, overexposed. Its sentiments were never correct. True liberty carries with it responsibility and much of the world's population, however wretched, is simply unable to cope with it.

    "Nobody writes this well anymore."

    Enoch Powell wrote far, far better than that. I will never forget the shock of reading his libelously misnamed "Rivers of Blood" speech. I was overwhelmed with the clarity of his thoughts and the beauty of their expression.

    Replies: @yaqub the mad scientist, @Dave Pinsen, @Lot, @Jenner Ickham Errican

    I agree that Powell’s Rivers of Blood speech was extremely good. It was also 5 decades ago by a man with the sort of classical education elites no longer receive except for the less than 1 in 1000 who get a graduate degree in classics or ancient history.

    It makes me sad to think the West no longer has any men of such caliber.

    http://www.vdare.com/articles/like-the-roman-i-seem-to-see-the-river-tiber-foaming-with-much-blood

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

    • Replies: @MC
    @Lot

    When homeschooling becomes mainstream, you may see his like again.

    , @Kylie
    @Lot

    "I agree that Powell’s Rivers of Blood speech was extremely good. It was also 5 decades ago by a man with the sort of classical education elites no longer receive except for the less than 1 in 1000 who get a graduate degree in classics or ancient history."

    I know. Even as I replied to you, I remembered that my time frame is quite different to most people's. I was taken to task a couple of years ago for saying Housman is my favorite modern poet.

    "It makes me sad to think the West no longer has any men of such caliber."

    Me, too. Sad and a little desperate. Truly I was born too late. I always feel like a stranger in a strange land. Because of that, a terrible longing and homesickness has followed me all my life. I've been blessed in many ways. I could not ask for better friends. But I am not where I should be.

    , @Clyde
    @Lot

    "The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils." -Enoch Powell 1968. His famous "Rivers of Blood" speech

    "In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature. One is that by the very order of things such evils are not demonstrable until they have occurred: At each stage in their onset there is room for doubt and for dispute whether they be real or imaginary. By the same token, they attract little attention in comparison with current troubles, which are both indisputable and pressing: whence the besetting temptation of all politics to concern itself with the immediate present at the expense of the future. Above all, people are disposed to mistake predicting troubles for causing troubles and even for desiring troubles: “if only”, they love to think, “if only people wouldn`t talk about it, it probably wouldn`t happen”. Perhaps this habit goes back to the primitive belief that the word and the thing, the name and the object, are identical."

    , @PiltdownMan
    @Lot

    While Enoch Powell indeed grew up in a time when a classical education was part of the normal school curriculum in Britain and the United States, it's worth noting that he was a top classics scholar at Cambridge, achieving an undergraduate double first, which is an about a once-in-a-decade kind of achievement.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mw4vMZDItQo

  98. @SPMoore8
    @Lot

    Thumbs down on the Lazarus poem. You'd have to read some Tennyson or Browning to see how bad her poetic skills actually were for her time. Furthermore, as an attempt to write what amounts to an Elizabethan era sonnet, it literally groans under the weight of its own storied pomp. I'll grant that the last five lines are pretty memorable, or maybe it's just because I have heard them so many times.

    Replies: @Lot

    I’ve read plenty of both and it stands with them. Obviously the public thought so as it is very well liked.

    It is very well rhymed, metered, and alliterated. I like

    astride from land to land;

    sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand

    whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning
    her name
    Mother of Exiles.

    world-wide welcome;

    wretched refuse … teeming tempest-tost to me,

    lift my lamp

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    @Lot

    I like "air-bridged harbor", whatever that meant.

    Replies: @Lot

    , @SPMoore8
    @Lot

    Okay, I respect your judgment, but if you like rhythmic alliterative sonnets, you can't do better than Hopkins (he was a priest, but just ignore that.)


    THE WORLD is charged with the grandeur of God.
    It will flame out, like shining from shook foil;
    It gathers to a greatness, like the ooze of oil
    Crushed. Why do men then now not reck his rod?
    Generations have trod, have trod, have trod; 5
    And all is seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil;
    And wears man’s smudge and shares man’s smell: the soil
    Is bare now, nor can foot feel, being shod.

    And for all this, nature is never spent;
    There lives the dearest freshness deep down things; 10
    And though the last lights off the black West went
    Oh, morning, at the brown brink eastward, springs—
    Because the Holy Ghost over the bent
    World broods with warm breast and with ah! bright wings.
     
    and

    I CAUGHT this morning morning’s minion, king-
    dom of daylight’s dauphin, dapple-dawn-drawn Falcon, in his riding
    Of the rolling level underneath him steady air, and striding
    High there, how he rung upon the rein of a wimpling wing
    In his ecstasy! then off, off forth on swing, 5
    As a skate’s heel sweeps smooth on a bow-bend: the hurl and gliding
    Rebuffed the big wind. My heart in hiding
    Stirred for a bird,—the achieve of; the mastery of the thing!

    Brute beauty and valour and act, oh, air, pride, plume, here
    Buckle! AND the fire that breaks from thee then, a billion 10
    Times told lovelier, more dangerous, O my chevalier!

    No wonder of it: shéer plód makes plough down sillion
    Shine, and blue-bleak embers, ah my dear,
    Fall, gall themselves, and gash gold-vermillion.
     

    Replies: @Kylie, @Lot

    , @Chrisnonymous
    @Lot

    You have valid points.

    It's not terrible, but I have to agree with the commenter who said the last 5 lines are, unfortunately, the stand-out section of the poem. The first 9, as you say, are well-rhymed, etc, but, particularly when read aloud, they are clunky, slightly cliched, and the lines don't all break well. For example,

    "Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand"
    almost crosses the line from alliteration to tongue-twister.

    "cries she / With silent lips"
    groan!

    "shall stand / A mighty woman with a torch"
    works well as "stand" sets up a question we want to have answered (since the sentence subject is positioned after the verb) and answers it satisfyingly. But
    "whose flame / Is the imprisoned lightning"
    doesn't work. We don't care about the flame, and "is the imprisoned lightning" is just filler--nice imagery, but with no point in the poem.

    "The imprisoned lightning" captures the poem's main artistic defect, which is that there is too much filler, especially the clause beginning "her mild eyes". Lazarus already referenced the statue's geographical location; she's doing it again because she didn't have a better idea for something to follow up the glowing beacon of welcome. Moreover, as Dave Pinsen points out, the Brooklyn Bridge doesn't even really go over the harbor. Some of her verbiage needs to be Ezra-Pound-ed into submission.

    In terms of content, while I generally dismiss claims of Jewish influence, in the case of this poem, it is quite clear that the poem intentionally re-purposes the statue from a celebration of freedom to a welcome specifically to Jews, announcing the USA as a new Jewish homeland. The original Colossus of Rhodes' dedication poem starts referencing the sun, the brazenness of the statue, and waves. Lazarus gives us "brazen" and "sea-washed sunset gates", establishing that her poem parallels the original Greek dedication.

    The original Colossus' Greek dedication then talks about kindling the torch of freedom and independence, but does Lazarus give us a parallel freedom torch in her poem? No, her torch is simply a beacon to follow, rather like the pillar of fire that the Israelites followed to the promised land.

    Does the poem ask for the poor and huddle masses? Yes, but it also identifies the homeless, tempest-tost and calls the statue the Mother of Exiles... Were the poor of Europe homeless and exiled? No, but of course Jewish people were.

    The poem ends with the "golden door" to the USA. What is this golden door, this poem's culmination, this strange imagery that we never notice because we stop paying attention after "breathe free"? I think given the propensity for religious imagery in 19th century America, we can say quite certainly that it is Jerusalem's Gate of Mercy, which is also called the Golden Gate, one with Messianic importance for Jews.

    The imagery of the poem could be dismissed if it weren't for the fact that Emma Lazarus was strongly concerned with the problem of Jews as eternal exiles and was a proponent of a Jewish homeland.

    The original Greek Colossus' dedication ends saying that the sea and land belong to the descendants of Hercules (in the vein of "to us and our posterity") while Lazarus' dedication ends saying that the land should be populated by foreigners who enter through the שער הרחמים. It is quite clear that Lazarus intended her dedication to envision not a statue to celebrate the homeland of its natives but a statue to collect and create a new homeland for Jews.

    And that brings us to my major objection to the poem, which is not actually its art or its Zionism, but the way that, in acting as an intentional inversion of the original Greek dedication poem, it asks us to see the Statue of Liberty as a feminist, pacifist, "cuck" symbol.

    While the Greek dedication praises the people for crowning their city with the spoils of an enemy who attacked them, Lazarus poem begins with the double-entendre of "brazen", suggesting the Greeks were shameless in celebrating their military victory. It then continues with the original complaint of "manspreading", comparing the Colossus' spread legs to the Greeks' shameless military bravado, and saying that the USA would not have this masculine symbol, but instead "a mighty woman", a "Mother". And what will this mother do? Will she take care of us, her children? No, she'll take care of the children of other nations, and we should praise her for it.

    I don't hate the Statue of Liberty, as I don't entirely hate past immigration to the US. However, I don't like Lazarus' poem, and I think the statue ought to be a symbol of American liberty as an example to the world, not a symbol of American largesse as a right of the world.

    I think these lines are appropos today:

    O Liberty, white Goddess! is it well
    To leave the gates unguarded? On thy breast
    Fold Sorrow’s children, soothe the hurts of fate,
    Lift the down-trodden, but with hand of steel
    Stay those who to thy sacred portals come
    To waste the gifts of freedom.

    The whole poem is worth reading...
    http://www.bartleby.com/248/689.html

  99. @Lot
    @SPMoore8

    I've read plenty of both and it stands with them. Obviously the public thought so as it is very well liked.

    It is very well rhymed, metered, and alliterated. I like

    astride from land to land;

    sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand

    whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning
    her name
    Mother of Exiles.

    world-wide welcome;

    wretched refuse ... teeming tempest-tost to me,

    lift my lamp

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @SPMoore8, @Chrisnonymous

    I like “air-bridged harbor”, whatever that meant.

    • Replies: @Lot
    @Dave Pinsen


    I like “air-bridged harbor”, whatever that meant.
     
    It is a great pair of poetic feet.

    Probably refers to the Brooklyn Bridge, completed the year of the poem and by far the largest and most advanced suspension bridge in the world.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen

  100. @Brutusale
    @peterike

    What happened in Newport doesn't really matter. What happened in Roger Williams' Rhode Island, however, was being pretty much the only colony with freedom of religion. It would naturally be the landing point for a Jew.

    Replies: @ben tillman

    What happened in Newport doesn’t really matter. What happened in Roger Williams’ Rhode Island, however, was being pretty much the only colony with freedom of religion. It would naturally be the landing point for a Jew.

    Funny, then, that so many chose to go elsewhere.

    • Replies: @Brutusale
    @ben tillman

    Those Jews, they Wander.

  101. @Crawfurdmuir
    @Jack D


    The idea that to be a “real” American you had to be of white Anglo-Saxon Protestant stock was retconned into American history in the late 19th century when lots of immigrants started showing up.
     
    John Jay wrote in Federalist No. 2:

    "Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people--a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty and independence."

    He seemed to think there was a "founding stock" - to whom was he referring?

    Replies: @Flip

    Interesting that he was of French and Dutch ancestry rather than English and still felt this way.

    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
    @Flip


    Interesting that he was of French and Dutch ancestry rather than English and still felt this way.
     
    When we use the phrase "white Anglo-Saxon Protestant" or its acronym WASP we should remember how its originator Digby Baltzell used it. He didn't exclude people of Dutch or Huguenot ancestry (or Scots or Germans, for that matter) who were parts of colonial society, and intermarried with the predominantly English population of the thirteen colonies. It was more an identification by shared cultural heritage descending from 17th-century colonial settlement and upper-middle to upper class social status than a strictly genealogical definition. That Jay could describe the American population at the time of the Revolution as one united people descended from the same ancestors reflects how well established the identification already had become by then.

    We might ask what could be WASPier than "The 400" - the cream of 19th century society, so called because 400 people could fit in the ballroom of Mrs. Astor's New York mansion. Yet Mrs. Astor's maiden name was Schermerhorn, which was Dutch, while Mr. Astor was of German ancestry, and the society journalist who coined the phrase "The 400" was Ward McAllister, was of Scottish descent.

    People of these national origins were present in 18th-century England as well as its colonies, and sometimes reached the heights of English society. They were in any event all drawn from a relatively small area of northwestern Europe and shared very similar genetic characteristics.

    Replies: @Clyde

    , @Discard
    @Flip

    The King of England, (George III) was German at the time of the American Revolution. Before his grandfather (George I),took the throne, the previous King (William of Orange) was Dutch.

    I'd say the Founders accepted a certain amount of Northern European mixing. Moslems? I doubt it.

    Replies: @Lot

  102. @JohnnyD
    I think it's safe to bet that most immigration enthusiasts haven't really study Lazarus's poem. It's specifically about immigration from Europe, or taking in the "wretched refuse" of Europe. I don't think anyone in the late 19th or early 20th century was even thinking about immigration from Central America or the Middle East.

    Replies: @Lot, @ben tillman

    I think it’s safe to bet that most immigration enthusiasts haven’t really study Lazarus’s poem. It’s specifically about immigration from Europe, or taking in the “wretched refuse” of Europe.

    Exactly. In the early 1880’s, immigration was largely of Irish, Italians, Germans, Slavs, and Jews, not Syrian rapeugees and Somali welfare jihadis.

    The great wave of European immigration Lazarus was writing about grew the white percentage of the population of the USA from about 80% in 1830 to 90% in 1930.

    I don’t think anyone in the late 19th or early 20th century was even thinking about immigration from Central America or the Middle East.

    Central America/Mexico had much lower population densities, so much more land and resources per person, compared to now. Their middle and upper classes had no reason to leave, and their lower classes were illiterate and without the means to travel or knowledge of anything about the United States.

    The era did see a steady stream of Christian middle east immigration fleeing Muslim massacres, but the basic economic dynamic that kept out latin americans applied to Muslim middle easterners.

  103. @Lot
    @Kylie

    I agree that Powell's Rivers of Blood speech was extremely good. It was also 5 decades ago by a man with the sort of classical education elites no longer receive except for the less than 1 in 1000 who get a graduate degree in classics or ancient history.

    It makes me sad to think the West no longer has any men of such caliber.

    http://www.vdare.com/articles/like-the-roman-i-seem-to-see-the-river-tiber-foaming-with-much-blood

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

    Replies: @MC, @Kylie, @Clyde, @PiltdownMan

    When homeschooling becomes mainstream, you may see his like again.

  104. @Dave Pinsen
    @Lot

    I like "air-bridged harbor", whatever that meant.

    Replies: @Lot

    I like “air-bridged harbor”, whatever that meant.

    It is a great pair of poetic feet.

    Probably refers to the Brooklyn Bridge, completed the year of the poem and by far the largest and most advanced suspension bridge in the world.

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    @Lot

    The Brooklyn Bridge doesn't cross New York Harbor though, but the East River. The Verrazano Bridge I guess comes closest, but it wouldn't be built until ~80 years later.

    There's also a 20th century meaning of airbridge that wouldn't apply in Lazarus's time either.

  105. @Kylie
    @Lot

    "I followed your link in the article to The New Colossus, and was reminded that it is a remarkably beautiful poem. Circa 1883, when it was written, its sentiments were quite correct."

    Are you kidding no question mark. The poem is overwritten, overwrought and worst of all, overexposed. Its sentiments were never correct. True liberty carries with it responsibility and much of the world's population, however wretched, is simply unable to cope with it.

    "Nobody writes this well anymore."

    Enoch Powell wrote far, far better than that. I will never forget the shock of reading his libelously misnamed "Rivers of Blood" speech. I was overwhelmed with the clarity of his thoughts and the beauty of their expression.

    Replies: @yaqub the mad scientist, @Dave Pinsen, @Lot, @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Enoch Powell wrote far, far better than that. I will never forget the shock of reading his libelously misnamed “Rivers of Blood” speech.

    Powell’s enemies may have meant to lambaste, but the summation is a pithy warning of what’s at stake, particularly to the commoner who might not be inclined to read (or find) a transcript of his speech.

    The (Heartiste) summation du jour: Diversity + Proximity = War

    It seems the recurring “Trump’s Luck” headlines are proving this to be true.

    • Agree: Kylie
  106. @JerryC
    Or maybe it's not so much of a nightmare for the establishment after all? The public seems to side with Obama over Trump on the issue by a rather large margin.

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/06/are-democrats-winning-political-battle-over-islamic-terror.php

    Perhaps The Megaphone is invincible after all?

    Replies: @candid_observer, @ben tillman, @Trumpenproleteriat

    I just about never engage in conspiracy theories, for the very basic reason that they are almost always wrong. But I have to say I’m just not believing that the results of the poll, and the reporting on them, could be close to the truth.

    Look, unbiased polls have shown that most Americans actually have supported Trump’s idea of a temporary ban on Muslim immigration (which I honestly have a problem with, if it is an explicit religious test). This was before Orlando.

    After Orlando, the vast majority think his approach is just way wrong? After?

    Something just isn’t right about this — it fails basic sanity checks.

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    @candid_observer


    After Orlando, the vast majority think his approach is just way wrong? After?

    Something just isn’t right about this — it fails basic sanity checks.
     

    Republicans were booing him in Greensboro. And our society is far from sane (i.e., healthy).

    Replies: @e

    , @candid_observer
    @candid_observer

    A Reuters 5-day running poll on the question:


    “Agree/Disagree: The United States should temporarily stop all Muslims from entering the United States.”
     
    now shows a 50-42 advantage to "agree" -- a rather dramatic swing.

    http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/06/15/trumpism-winning-donald-trump-win/

    Since it's a 5-day rolling poll, one would ordinarily expect that when all 5-days of polling are finally after Orlando, the swing would be even greater.

    So how can it be that in the CBS poll, supposedly only 25% of Americans approve of Trump's approach to Orlando?

    I smell a rat.
  107. @The Undiscovered Jew
    Forgive me for interrupting the standard blood libeling (I sympathize deeply with how Steve relies on them for tipjar income) but Lazarus in 1883 was addressing 19th century European immigration only. That form of immigration - despite the best efforts of many here to alienate the close to 100 million ethnic white Americans who are not 'founding stock' Anglo-Saxons - is in many important respects a completely separate issue from modern day non-European immigration.

    Polish, Italian, Greek, and Great Wave descended Irish Americans also find the poem very touching because it was meant as a tribute to them. But there's little tipjar money to be raised from pointing that out, right Steveo?

    Replies: @Clyde, @Dave Pinsen, @ben tillman, @grmbl

    Lazarus in 1883 was addressing 19th century European immigration only. That form of immigration – despite the best efforts of many here to alienate the close to 100 million ethnic white Americans who are not ‘founding stock’ Anglo-Saxons – is in many important respects a completely separate issue from modern day non-European immigration.

    Good point and European immigration was the only kind there was and was the only kind imaginable back then. All changed in the 1965 Immigration Act which also was when Australia abandoned its White Australia immigration policies. Great Britain started admitting colonials. Emma Lazarus’ poem was legitimate to put on the Statue of Liberty because America needed more people to labor away and fill this country up. Today we do not need unskilled third worlders, the robots are coming to eliminate jobs, so the plaque should be removed.
    Christian Arabs from the Levant are the only non-Europeans I can think of that were allowed in during the great wave before 1920

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    @Clyde

    Christian Arabs from the Levant : Don't forget Armenians, my family was involved with that.

    Replies: @Jefferson

    , @SFG
    @Clyde

    Yeah, it was legitimate back then. There's no reason you have to hold the same immigration policy all the time. It should vary depending on the needs of the target country.

    But even if Trump wins, I'm in favor of letting the plaque remain and turn green. There's something to be said for letting remnants of the past's ideologies hang around, if only so people realize that their forebears didn't think the same way they did. These attempts to turn Alexander Hamilton into a modern-day SJW are really, really silly.

  108. @Lot
    @Kylie

    I agree that Powell's Rivers of Blood speech was extremely good. It was also 5 decades ago by a man with the sort of classical education elites no longer receive except for the less than 1 in 1000 who get a graduate degree in classics or ancient history.

    It makes me sad to think the West no longer has any men of such caliber.

    http://www.vdare.com/articles/like-the-roman-i-seem-to-see-the-river-tiber-foaming-with-much-blood

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

    Replies: @MC, @Kylie, @Clyde, @PiltdownMan

    “I agree that Powell’s Rivers of Blood speech was extremely good. It was also 5 decades ago by a man with the sort of classical education elites no longer receive except for the less than 1 in 1000 who get a graduate degree in classics or ancient history.”

    I know. Even as I replied to you, I remembered that my time frame is quite different to most people’s. I was taken to task a couple of years ago for saying Housman is my favorite modern poet.

    “It makes me sad to think the West no longer has any men of such caliber.”

    Me, too. Sad and a little desperate. Truly I was born too late. I always feel like a stranger in a strange land. Because of that, a terrible longing and homesickness has followed me all my life. I’ve been blessed in many ways. I could not ask for better friends. But I am not where I should be.

  109. @JerryC
    Or maybe it's not so much of a nightmare for the establishment after all? The public seems to side with Obama over Trump on the issue by a rather large margin.

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/06/are-democrats-winning-political-battle-over-islamic-terror.php

    Perhaps The Megaphone is invincible after all?

    Replies: @candid_observer, @ben tillman, @Trumpenproleteriat

    Or maybe it’s not so much of a nightmare for the establishment after all? The public seems to side with Obama over Trump on the issue by a rather large margin.

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/06/are-democrats-winning-political-battle-over-islamic-terror.php

    Perhaps The Megaphone is invincible after all?

    Undoubtedly.

  110. @candid_observer
    @JerryC

    I just about never engage in conspiracy theories, for the very basic reason that they are almost always wrong. But I have to say I'm just not believing that the results of the poll, and the reporting on them, could be close to the truth.

    Look, unbiased polls have shown that most Americans actually have supported Trump's idea of a temporary ban on Muslim immigration (which I honestly have a problem with, if it is an explicit religious test). This was before Orlando.

    After Orlando, the vast majority think his approach is just way wrong? After?

    Something just isn't right about this -- it fails basic sanity checks.

    Replies: @ben tillman, @candid_observer

    After Orlando, the vast majority think his approach is just way wrong? After?

    Something just isn’t right about this — it fails basic sanity checks.

    Republicans were booing him in Greensboro. And our society is far from sane (i.e., healthy).

    • Replies: @e
    @ben tillman

    Republicans were booing him in Greensboro. And our society is far from sane (i.e., healthy).


    The Greensboro rally? I don't think so. I do believe that was the rally I watched streamed live on the Conservative Treehouse and any booing you heard was the crowd booing protestors.

  111. @Lot
    @Kylie

    I agree that Powell's Rivers of Blood speech was extremely good. It was also 5 decades ago by a man with the sort of classical education elites no longer receive except for the less than 1 in 1000 who get a graduate degree in classics or ancient history.

    It makes me sad to think the West no longer has any men of such caliber.

    http://www.vdare.com/articles/like-the-roman-i-seem-to-see-the-river-tiber-foaming-with-much-blood

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

    Replies: @MC, @Kylie, @Clyde, @PiltdownMan

    “The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils.” -Enoch Powell 1968. His famous “Rivers of Blood” speech

    “In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature. One is that by the very order of things such evils are not demonstrable until they have occurred: At each stage in their onset there is room for doubt and for dispute whether they be real or imaginary. By the same token, they attract little attention in comparison with current troubles, which are both indisputable and pressing: whence the besetting temptation of all politics to concern itself with the immediate present at the expense of the future. Above all, people are disposed to mistake predicting troubles for causing troubles and even for desiring troubles: “if only”, they love to think, “if only people wouldn`t talk about it, it probably wouldn`t happen”. Perhaps this habit goes back to the primitive belief that the word and the thing, the name and the object, are identical.”

  112. La Raza has been strangely silent on the massacre of their constituency. I wonder why.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    @Kristen

    "La Raza has been strangely silent on the massacre of their constituency. I wonder why."

    They are silent because it was not a White Donald Trump supporter who murdered 50 Gay Hispanics.

    Or maybe La Raza does not include Puerto Ricans in their definition of La Raza, after all the Godfathers of La Raza are all Mexicans. It originally started as a Mexican organization rather than a pan-Latino organization.

  113. @1stTimeCallerLongTimeListener
    @Dave Pinsen

    At least we wouldn't have the words "wretched refuse" associated with the zeroth amendment.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    Yeah, the “wretched refuse” line sticks out. It brings to mind a garbage-strewn beach. Maybe it sounded different to 19th Century ears. I assume she was making an ironic point: “You think your people are garbage, but we’ll take them and prove you wrong”.

    Of course, it’s worth remembering how different things were during the Ellis Island era of immigration. For one thing, the selection criteria were stricter then than now. We’re importing immigrants with tuberculosis now. Ellis Island would have shipped them back.

    Also, there was no government safety net for immigrants back then. Some who couldn’t make a go of it, went back to their countries of origin.

    • Replies: @iSteveFan
    @Dave Pinsen

    Wasn't the actual wretched refuse identified on Ellis Island and then deported back whence they had come?

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen

  114. @JohnnyD
    I think it's safe to bet that most immigration enthusiasts haven't really study Lazarus's poem. It's specifically about immigration from Europe, or taking in the "wretched refuse" of Europe. I don't think anyone in the late 19th or early 20th century was even thinking about immigration from Central America or the Middle East.

    Replies: @Lot, @ben tillman

    I think it’s safe to bet that most immigration enthusiasts haven’t really study Lazarus’s poem. It’s specifically about immigration from Europe, or taking in the “wretched refuse” of Europe. I don’t think anyone in the late 19th or early 20th century was even thinking about immigration from Central America or the Middle East.

    You don’t need to think about it to advocate it. Things like that just come naturally for some.

  115. @The Undiscovered Jew
    Forgive me for interrupting the standard blood libeling (I sympathize deeply with how Steve relies on them for tipjar income) but Lazarus in 1883 was addressing 19th century European immigration only. That form of immigration - despite the best efforts of many here to alienate the close to 100 million ethnic white Americans who are not 'founding stock' Anglo-Saxons - is in many important respects a completely separate issue from modern day non-European immigration.

    Polish, Italian, Greek, and Great Wave descended Irish Americans also find the poem very touching because it was meant as a tribute to them. But there's little tipjar money to be raised from pointing that out, right Steveo?

    Replies: @Clyde, @Dave Pinsen, @ben tillman, @grmbl

    But there’s little tipjar money to be raised from pointing that out, right Steveo?

    It sounds like you’re suggesting that Jews don’t tip.

    • Replies: @Lot
    @Dave Pinsen

    Zing!

    , @The Undiscovered Jew
    @Dave Pinsen

    Why should tip Sailer if he insists on blaming us for something we aren't responsible for?

    Would you tip me if I changed your credit reports to suggest you've filed for bankruptcy ten times and served time in prison for multiple felonies?

    It's a shame for him that he doesn't want our help since he could raise much more money than whatever he's getting from his current donors.

  116. @The Undiscovered Jew
    Forgive me for interrupting the standard blood libeling (I sympathize deeply with how Steve relies on them for tipjar income) but Lazarus in 1883 was addressing 19th century European immigration only. That form of immigration - despite the best efforts of many here to alienate the close to 100 million ethnic white Americans who are not 'founding stock' Anglo-Saxons - is in many important respects a completely separate issue from modern day non-European immigration.

    Polish, Italian, Greek, and Great Wave descended Irish Americans also find the poem very touching because it was meant as a tribute to them. But there's little tipjar money to be raised from pointing that out, right Steveo?

    Replies: @Clyde, @Dave Pinsen, @ben tillman, @grmbl

    Forgive me for interrupting the standard blood libeling (I sympathize deeply with how Steve relies on them for tipjar income) but Lazarus in 1883 was addressing 19th century European immigration only. That form of immigration – despite the best efforts of many here to alienate the close to 100 million ethnic white Americans who are not ‘founding stock’ Anglo-Saxons – is in many important respects a completely separate issue from modern day non-European immigration.

    Modern-day non-European immigration is a result of the European immigration you defend.

  117. @Kristen
    La Raza has been strangely silent on the massacre of their constituency. I wonder why.

    Replies: @Jefferson

    “La Raza has been strangely silent on the massacre of their constituency. I wonder why.”

    They are silent because it was not a White Donald Trump supporter who murdered 50 Gay Hispanics.

    Or maybe La Raza does not include Puerto Ricans in their definition of La Raza, after all the Godfathers of La Raza are all Mexicans. It originally started as a Mexican organization rather than a pan-Latino organization.

  118. @Lot
    @Dave Pinsen


    I like “air-bridged harbor”, whatever that meant.
     
    It is a great pair of poetic feet.

    Probably refers to the Brooklyn Bridge, completed the year of the poem and by far the largest and most advanced suspension bridge in the world.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    The Brooklyn Bridge doesn’t cross New York Harbor though, but the East River. The Verrazano Bridge I guess comes closest, but it wouldn’t be built until ~80 years later.

    There’s also a 20th century meaning of airbridge that wouldn’t apply in Lazarus’s time either.

  119. Why in the world do we need any Muslim immigration? Aren’t we diverse enough?

    These people are true idiots.

    In a poll more people support tighter gun control than a ban on Muslims.

    It seems most people are dumb too,

    Why can’t we ban Muslims and make it a little harder to get a gun?

  120. The anti White male coalition has lasted as least as long as the Cold War and seems founded on the principal that women, gays, Latins, Blacks etc hate hate hate White more than each other. Seems very stable. I bieve the polls, Mitch McConnel says he backs gun control/confiscation, so des Paul Ryan.

    Woen and gays want to submitand surrender to violent killers. It is hard wired. That’s just how it is. Another jihadi mass attack and Hillary wins in a landslide. Men fight. Women surrender.

  121. I wonder if the Afghani Omar Mateen has ever been mistaken for a Latino in Florida? I have read of many cases of Arabs being mistaken for Latinos in U.S states that have a large Latino population.

  122. “Republicans were booing him in Greensboro. And our society is far from sane (i.e., healthy).”

    I watched a few minutes of that speech, though not the whole thing. The crowd didn’t seem terribly enthused when Trump reached out to gays but I didn’t hear them boo him. I doubt the crowd had gone full Islamophile or hoplophobe.

  123. @Dave Pinsen
    @1stTimeCallerLongTimeListener

    Yeah, the "wretched refuse" line sticks out. It brings to mind a garbage-strewn beach. Maybe it sounded different to 19th Century ears. I assume she was making an ironic point: "You think your people are garbage, but we'll take them and prove you wrong".

    Of course, it's worth remembering how different things were during the Ellis Island era of immigration. For one thing, the selection criteria were stricter then than now. We're importing immigrants with tuberculosis now. Ellis Island would have shipped them back.

    Also, there was no government safety net for immigrants back then. Some who couldn't make a go of it, went back to their countries of origin.

    Replies: @iSteveFan

    Wasn’t the actual wretched refuse identified on Ellis Island and then deported back whence they had come?

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    @iSteveFan

    Right.

  124. @Anon
    @LondonBob

    The American media is leftist because of Nixon. The left-wing media were deified during the Nixonian era, and this inspired a whole generation of hardcore leftists to enter the reporting field. For a while, they were held in check by the rule of the centrist Greatest Generation guys who were their bosses (being an eyewitness to Stalin, Mao, and Hitler at their most extreme tended to make you a very determined centrist because it was the only sane spot left), but then all the GG guys started retiring and dying off in the late 80s and 90s. After that, the lefties inherited the top jobs in the media by sheer force of numbers.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

    Yep, they watched “All The President’s Men” and thought, yeah, that’s what I wanna do. Screw starting as a police reporter on the Wichita Beacon, I’m gonna go to to J-school!

  125. @The Undiscovered Jew
    @Jack D

    They have no evidence Jews ethnically benefit from immigration except for MacDonald's bogus history of immigration lobbying.

    According to Barry Mehler he distorted what his sources said about Jews and immigration lobbying to falsely imply Jews before WWII wanted multicultural immigration (the actual sources say they were limited to helping Jewish refugees escape persecution).

    And there other examples of MacDonald - the only source antisemites have for their interpretation of Jewish immigration lobbying - lying.

    I want an explanation for how this doesn't qualify as a lie and why Jews should accept MacDonald's history as anything but a con:

    1) MacDonald refers to a study about authoritarianism among religious groups and claims the results prove Jews are highly authoritarian.

    2) The actual study says Jews tied with Anglicans and Unitarians for being among the least authoritarian of all measured religious groups.



    http://web.archive.org/web/20090411051702/http://www.people.hbs.edu/dlieberman/lieberman.jewsRaceEmpire.pdf

    Kevin MacDonald:

    Altemeyer (1988, 2) defines “right-wing authoritarianism” as involving three central attributes: submission to legitimate authority; aggression toward individuals that is sanctioned by the authorities; adherence to social conventions. Clearly, individuals high on these traits would be ideal members of cohesive human group evolutionary strategies. Indeed, such attributes would define the ideal Jew in traditional societies: submissive to the kehilla authorities, strongly adherent to within – group social conventions such as the observance of Jewish religious law, and characterized by negative attitudes toward gentile society and culture seen as manifestations of an outgroup. Consistent with this formulation, high scorers on the Right-Wing Authoritarianism Scale (RWA) tend to be highly religious; they tend to be the most orthodox members of their denomination; they believe in group cohesiveness, group loyalty, and identify strongly with ingroups

    (Altemeyer 1994, 134; 1996, 84). Without question, traditional Jewish society and contemporary Jewish Orthodox and fundamentalist groups are highly authoritarian by any measure. Indeed, Rubenstein (1996) found that Orthodox Jews were higher on RWA than “traditional Jews,” and both of these groups were higher than secular Jews.59

    The real study:

    [A]re “very accepting” subjects equally authoritarian in all religions? Or do different denominations (as argued earlier) produce different levels of authoritarianism even among the strongly committed? If we examine just those subjects who answered the (0-5) “still accept” question with either a “4” or a “5” (that is, they indicated they “nearly completely” or “completely” accepted the religious beliefs taught them in childhood), who do you think were the most authoritarian of all these “true believers”? Fundamentalists (185.1) and Mennonites (185.3) among the students, Mennonites (202.1) and Fundamentalists (208.5) among the parents. The (rarer) United Church members, Anglicans, and Jews who were just as accepting of their religions scored about 25 points lower. True-believing Catholics and Lutherans lay somewhere in between. 61

    So not only are Jews among the least authoritarian of religious groups, according to Altemeyer highly religious Jews are among the least authoritarian of the highly religious.

    Yet in an awe-inspiring display of sheer gall (dare I say, 'chutzpah'?), MacDonald takes information Altemeyer has collected from studies of subjects explicitly identified as “White North Americans” and applies it willy-nilly to the Jews whom Altemeyer, working from actual data rather than his own 'suppositions,' largely exempts from the discussion. The point is worth emphasizing: these highly ethnocentric, highly authoritarian, highly self-deceptive “people who are highly attracted to cohesive groups,” as MacDonald so guardedly puts it, whom MacDonald adduces as evidence for the self-deceptive tendencies of Jewish “hyper-collectivism,” were in fact members of MacDonald's own ethnic group. I can think of no other way to describe this conduct than as an act of deliberate fraud.

    Replies: @ben tillman, @ben tillman, @anon, @anon

    Jews were no more guilty of opening the borders than any other elite gentile American.

    It was a Jewish project. That the Jewish community persuaded or propagandized others to go along with it does not change that fact.

  126. @Lot
    @SPMoore8

    I've read plenty of both and it stands with them. Obviously the public thought so as it is very well liked.

    It is very well rhymed, metered, and alliterated. I like

    astride from land to land;

    sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand

    whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning
    her name
    Mother of Exiles.

    world-wide welcome;

    wretched refuse ... teeming tempest-tost to me,

    lift my lamp

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @SPMoore8, @Chrisnonymous

    Okay, I respect your judgment, but if you like rhythmic alliterative sonnets, you can’t do better than Hopkins (he was a priest, but just ignore that.)

    THE WORLD is charged with the grandeur of God.
    It will flame out, like shining from shook foil;
    It gathers to a greatness, like the ooze of oil
    Crushed. Why do men then now not reck his rod?
    Generations have trod, have trod, have trod; 5
    And all is seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil;
    And wears man’s smudge and shares man’s smell: the soil
    Is bare now, nor can foot feel, being shod.

    And for all this, nature is never spent;
    There lives the dearest freshness deep down things; 10
    And though the last lights off the black West went
    Oh, morning, at the brown brink eastward, springs—
    Because the Holy Ghost over the bent
    World broods with warm breast and with ah! bright wings.

    and

    I CAUGHT this morning morning’s minion, king-
    dom of daylight’s dauphin, dapple-dawn-drawn Falcon, in his riding
    Of the rolling level underneath him steady air, and striding
    High there, how he rung upon the rein of a wimpling wing
    In his ecstasy! then off, off forth on swing, 5
    As a skate’s heel sweeps smooth on a bow-bend: the hurl and gliding
    Rebuffed the big wind. My heart in hiding
    Stirred for a bird,—the achieve of; the mastery of the thing!

    Brute beauty and valour and act, oh, air, pride, plume, here
    Buckle! AND the fire that breaks from thee then, a billion 10
    Times told lovelier, more dangerous, O my chevalier!

    No wonder of it: shéer plód makes plough down sillion
    Shine, and blue-bleak embers, ah my dear,
    Fall, gall themselves, and gash gold-vermillion.

    • Replies: @Kylie
    @SPMoore8

    Funny, I also thought of "The Windhover" while reading through this thread.

    Let me add another of his poems that's wonderfully rhythmic and alliterative.


    Inversnaid


    THIS darksome burn, horseback brown,
    His rollrock highroad roaring down,
    In coop and in comb the fleece of his foam
    Flutes and low to the lake falls home.

    A windpuff-bonnet of fáwn-fróth 5
    Turns and twindles over the broth
    Of a pool so pitchblack, féll-frówning,
    It rounds and rounds Despair to drowning.

    Degged with dew, dappled with dew
    Are the groins of the braes that the brook treads through, 10
    Wiry heathpacks, flitches of fern,
    And the beadbonny ash that sits over the burn.

    What would the world be, once bereft
    Of wet and of wildness? Let them be left,
    O let them be left, wildness and wet; 15
    Long live the weeds and the wilderness yet.

    , @Lot
    @SPMoore8


    Okay, I respect your judgment, but if you like rhythmic alliterative sonnets, you can’t do better than Hopkins
     
    I do, and Hopkins is on my top 10 list for sure, maybe top 5.

    Hopkins however overuses extremely obscure words. In your excerpt you have the word "sillion." From the context and sound it probably means "soil," but it interrupts the flow of reading to use such words so often.

    Looking the word up, it turns out that the word is "Revived by Gerard Manley Hopkins in 1877" and almost every use of the word on the internet cites Hopkins.

    And right before this he uses "wimpling" which at best an educating reader would guess mean to manufacture a wimple or the act of placing one on a nun.

    Wimple as a noun is already is borderline obscure, but turning it into a verb?

    Replies: @SPMoore8

  127. @ben tillman
    @candid_observer


    After Orlando, the vast majority think his approach is just way wrong? After?

    Something just isn’t right about this — it fails basic sanity checks.
     

    Republicans were booing him in Greensboro. And our society is far from sane (i.e., healthy).

    Replies: @e

    Republicans were booing him in Greensboro. And our society is far from sane (i.e., healthy).

    The Greensboro rally? I don’t think so. I do believe that was the rally I watched streamed live on the Conservative Treehouse and any booing you heard was the crowd booing protestors.

  128. @SPMoore8
    @Lot

    Okay, I respect your judgment, but if you like rhythmic alliterative sonnets, you can't do better than Hopkins (he was a priest, but just ignore that.)


    THE WORLD is charged with the grandeur of God.
    It will flame out, like shining from shook foil;
    It gathers to a greatness, like the ooze of oil
    Crushed. Why do men then now not reck his rod?
    Generations have trod, have trod, have trod; 5
    And all is seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil;
    And wears man’s smudge and shares man’s smell: the soil
    Is bare now, nor can foot feel, being shod.

    And for all this, nature is never spent;
    There lives the dearest freshness deep down things; 10
    And though the last lights off the black West went
    Oh, morning, at the brown brink eastward, springs—
    Because the Holy Ghost over the bent
    World broods with warm breast and with ah! bright wings.
     
    and

    I CAUGHT this morning morning’s minion, king-
    dom of daylight’s dauphin, dapple-dawn-drawn Falcon, in his riding
    Of the rolling level underneath him steady air, and striding
    High there, how he rung upon the rein of a wimpling wing
    In his ecstasy! then off, off forth on swing, 5
    As a skate’s heel sweeps smooth on a bow-bend: the hurl and gliding
    Rebuffed the big wind. My heart in hiding
    Stirred for a bird,—the achieve of; the mastery of the thing!

    Brute beauty and valour and act, oh, air, pride, plume, here
    Buckle! AND the fire that breaks from thee then, a billion 10
    Times told lovelier, more dangerous, O my chevalier!

    No wonder of it: shéer plód makes plough down sillion
    Shine, and blue-bleak embers, ah my dear,
    Fall, gall themselves, and gash gold-vermillion.
     

    Replies: @Kylie, @Lot

    Funny, I also thought of “The Windhover” while reading through this thread.

    Let me add another of his poems that’s wonderfully rhythmic and alliterative.

    Inversnaid

    THIS darksome burn, horseback brown,
    His rollrock highroad roaring down,
    In coop and in comb the fleece of his foam
    Flutes and low to the lake falls home.

    A windpuff-bonnet of fáwn-fróth 5
    Turns and twindles over the broth
    Of a pool so pitchblack, féll-frówning,
    It rounds and rounds Despair to drowning.

    Degged with dew, dappled with dew
    Are the groins of the braes that the brook treads through, 10
    Wiry heathpacks, flitches of fern,
    And the beadbonny ash that sits over the burn.

    What would the world be, once bereft
    Of wet and of wildness? Let them be left,
    O let them be left, wildness and wet; 15
    Long live the weeds and the wilderness yet.

  129. @The Undiscovered Jew
    @Jack D

    They have no evidence Jews ethnically benefit from immigration except for MacDonald's bogus history of immigration lobbying.

    According to Barry Mehler he distorted what his sources said about Jews and immigration lobbying to falsely imply Jews before WWII wanted multicultural immigration (the actual sources say they were limited to helping Jewish refugees escape persecution).

    And there other examples of MacDonald - the only source antisemites have for their interpretation of Jewish immigration lobbying - lying.

    I want an explanation for how this doesn't qualify as a lie and why Jews should accept MacDonald's history as anything but a con:

    1) MacDonald refers to a study about authoritarianism among religious groups and claims the results prove Jews are highly authoritarian.

    2) The actual study says Jews tied with Anglicans and Unitarians for being among the least authoritarian of all measured religious groups.



    http://web.archive.org/web/20090411051702/http://www.people.hbs.edu/dlieberman/lieberman.jewsRaceEmpire.pdf

    Kevin MacDonald:

    Altemeyer (1988, 2) defines “right-wing authoritarianism” as involving three central attributes: submission to legitimate authority; aggression toward individuals that is sanctioned by the authorities; adherence to social conventions. Clearly, individuals high on these traits would be ideal members of cohesive human group evolutionary strategies. Indeed, such attributes would define the ideal Jew in traditional societies: submissive to the kehilla authorities, strongly adherent to within – group social conventions such as the observance of Jewish religious law, and characterized by negative attitudes toward gentile society and culture seen as manifestations of an outgroup. Consistent with this formulation, high scorers on the Right-Wing Authoritarianism Scale (RWA) tend to be highly religious; they tend to be the most orthodox members of their denomination; they believe in group cohesiveness, group loyalty, and identify strongly with ingroups

    (Altemeyer 1994, 134; 1996, 84). Without question, traditional Jewish society and contemporary Jewish Orthodox and fundamentalist groups are highly authoritarian by any measure. Indeed, Rubenstein (1996) found that Orthodox Jews were higher on RWA than “traditional Jews,” and both of these groups were higher than secular Jews.59

    The real study:

    [A]re “very accepting” subjects equally authoritarian in all religions? Or do different denominations (as argued earlier) produce different levels of authoritarianism even among the strongly committed? If we examine just those subjects who answered the (0-5) “still accept” question with either a “4” or a “5” (that is, they indicated they “nearly completely” or “completely” accepted the religious beliefs taught them in childhood), who do you think were the most authoritarian of all these “true believers”? Fundamentalists (185.1) and Mennonites (185.3) among the students, Mennonites (202.1) and Fundamentalists (208.5) among the parents. The (rarer) United Church members, Anglicans, and Jews who were just as accepting of their religions scored about 25 points lower. True-believing Catholics and Lutherans lay somewhere in between. 61

    So not only are Jews among the least authoritarian of religious groups, according to Altemeyer highly religious Jews are among the least authoritarian of the highly religious.

    Yet in an awe-inspiring display of sheer gall (dare I say, 'chutzpah'?), MacDonald takes information Altemeyer has collected from studies of subjects explicitly identified as “White North Americans” and applies it willy-nilly to the Jews whom Altemeyer, working from actual data rather than his own 'suppositions,' largely exempts from the discussion. The point is worth emphasizing: these highly ethnocentric, highly authoritarian, highly self-deceptive “people who are highly attracted to cohesive groups,” as MacDonald so guardedly puts it, whom MacDonald adduces as evidence for the self-deceptive tendencies of Jewish “hyper-collectivism,” were in fact members of MacDonald's own ethnic group. I can think of no other way to describe this conduct than as an act of deliberate fraud.

    Replies: @ben tillman, @ben tillman, @anon, @anon

    They have no evidence Jews ethnically benefit from immigration except for MacDonald’s bogus history of immigration lobbying.

    According to Barry Mehler he distorted what his sources said about Jews and immigration lobbying to falsely imply Jews before WWII wanted multicultural immigration (the actual sources say they were limited to helping Jewish refugees escape persecution).

    How about a cite? I can’t find anything from Mehler; all I can find are others referring to what he supposedly said about one cite by MacDonald to S.M. Neuringer, and all these references focus on one particular statement by MacDonald in The Culture of Critique about what Neuringer had to say.

    Whatever the merits of Mehler’s criticism in that regard might be (although we can’t tell since Neuringer’s work is not available online), Mehler apparently had no problem with MacDonald’s other attributions to Neuringer, such as:

    p. 259 — “Jews have been “the single most persistent pressure group favoring a liberal immigration policy” in the United States in the entire immigration debate beginning in 1881 (Neuringer 1971, 392-393):

    In undertaking to sway immigration policy in a liberal direction, Jewish spokespersons and organizations demonstrated a degree of energy unsurpassed by any other interested pressure group. mmigration had constituted a prime object of concern for practically every Jewish defense and community relations organization.

    p. 261 — “. . . the [American Jewish] Committee funded pro-immigration groups composed of non-Jews.”

    p. 263 — “. . . the opposition of Jewish organizations to any restrictions on immigration based on race or ethnicity can be traced back to the nineteenth century. Thus in 1882 the Jewish press was unanimous in its condemnation of the Chinese Exclusion Act.”

    • Replies: @Lot
    @ben tillman


    p. 259 — “Jews have been “the single most persistent pressure group favoring a liberal immigration policy” in the United States in the entire immigration debate beginning in 1881 (Neuringer 1971, 392-393):
     
    What does "Jews" mean here? Organized Jewish groups? No way they are the "most persistent pressure group" for immigration, that would be low wage employers and companies that sell a lot of crap to poor hispanics (e.g. Proctor and Gamble, not Tiffany). And looking only at ethnic groups, the ones who care primarily about immigration are the hispanic ones.

    Replies: @ben tillman

  130. @fredyetagain aka superhonky
    @Jimi Shmendrix

    "Fancy how you managed to peg Emma Lazarus as a “Zionist” inasmuch as she died a decade before the Zionist movement was founded. Why not just say “Jew”? That is, of course, what you mean."

    Sorry bubbele, but according to the article below on the World Zionist Organization website, she was an advocate for a Jewish state, so Steve's characterization is fair. Steve's description of her as a Zionist had the effect in my mind of highlighting her monumental hypocrisy (i.e., Jews get their own state, while the American goyim must accept as potential citizens whatever dreck manages to wash up on their shores [and this as a moral imperative, per her loathsome poem]).

    http://www.wzo.org.il/index.php?dir=site&page=articles&op=item&cs=3318&langpage=heb&category=3040&language=eng

    Replies: @Bee, @Bee

    “Steve’s description of her as a Zionist had the effect in my mind of highlighting her monumental hypocrisy (i.e., Jews get their own state”

    Nope, she wasn’t a hypocrite. Jews are an ethnicity. “Americans” are not and never have been an ethnic group. Why do Americans deserve their own country? Unless you mean indigenous Americans (no, not Ann Coulter).

    On the other hand, the English, Irish, Scottish, Dutch, Italian, Latvians, etc. do have their own countries. And in all of those countries, those ethnic groups still do make up a higher percentage of the population than Jews do in Israel (76% of Israel is Jewish).

    • Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky
    @Bee

    "Why do Americans deserve their own country?"

    The answer to that question is self-evident to )))me((( and I would imagine most of Steve's readers. Sorry it's such a mystery to (((you))).

    Replies: @Bee

  131. Steve,

    We all love ya, but honest to God, give it a rest when it comes to JFK’s assassination. You don’t know shit.

    Don’t trot out that stupid Jackie quote, either. She sure didn’t mean it for long, and she probably didn’t even really say it.

    We all get it. You can’t criticize the American Military Industrial Machine in its heyday in any way, and if it is implicated in the murder of the century, you turn off your brain. (Some of us can guess why it is your weak spot. Maybe even you’ve figured it out.)

    You stop “noticing”.

    JFK wasn’t “killed by a communist”.

    He was murdered by his own National Security State, and every institution in America failed in its duty to tell the truth to the American people.

    You want evidence?

    How about this really simple recorded for all posterity example?

    Richard Russell (Warren Commission Member): “I don’t believe any of that (single-shot) bullet business.”

    President Lyndon Johnson: “Me neither.”

    They didn’t believe their own conclusions. No rational person should, either.

    Steve, what you choose to believe in your own head is your business. But pal, on this one, your on your own.

    • Replies: @Dirk Dagger
    @Paul Jolliffe

    No, Steve's correct, it was Oswald. You're a paranoid nut.

    Replies: @JohnnyWalker123

    , @Charles Erwin Wilson
    @Paul Jolliffe

    Nice of you to pop your head up out of the fever swamps to post. From Aaron Burr's departure, until Bill Clinton's arrival, LBJ was the most dishonest, self-serving, short-sighted politician in American history. And you quote LBJ to support your position.

    Oswald was a Castro-supporting Communist traitor, who murdered the last great Democrat president. The notion that an inept "American Military Industrial Machine" could perpetrate the fraud you claim is not just absurd, it is obtuse. Grow up, and turn your back on the leftist propaganda of the people that brought you the Vietnam 'war'.

  132. @Lot
    I followed your link in the article to The New Colossus, and was reminded that it is a remarkably beautiful poem. Circa 1883, when it was written, its sentiments were quite correct.

    Nobody writes this well anymore:

    Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
    With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
    Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
    A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
    Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
    Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
    The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

    "Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
    With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
     

    Replies: @vinteuil, @Anonymous, @Big Bill, @SPMoore8, @PiltdownMan, @boogerbently, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Kylie, @Njguy73, @SFG, @Olorin

    “Freedom is in danger of degenerating into mere arbitrariness unless it is lived in terms of responsibleness. That is why I recommend that the Statue of Liberty on the East Coast be supplemented by a Statue of Responsibility on the West Coast.” – Viktor Frankl

  133. @fredyetagain aka superhonky
    @Jimi Shmendrix

    "Fancy how you managed to peg Emma Lazarus as a “Zionist” inasmuch as she died a decade before the Zionist movement was founded. Why not just say “Jew”? That is, of course, what you mean."

    Sorry bubbele, but according to the article below on the World Zionist Organization website, she was an advocate for a Jewish state, so Steve's characterization is fair. Steve's description of her as a Zionist had the effect in my mind of highlighting her monumental hypocrisy (i.e., Jews get their own state, while the American goyim must accept as potential citizens whatever dreck manages to wash up on their shores [and this as a moral imperative, per her loathsome poem]).

    http://www.wzo.org.il/index.php?dir=site&page=articles&op=item&cs=3318&langpage=heb&category=3040&language=eng

    Replies: @Bee, @Bee

    BTW, that comment was not in support of more immigration. It was simply against the ludicrous idea that Lazarus was a hypocrite because “White Christian Americans are an ethnic group just like Jews”.

  134. @Dave Pinsen
    @The Undiscovered Jew


    But there’s little tipjar money to be raised from pointing that out, right Steveo?
     
    It sounds like you're suggesting that Jews don't tip.

    Replies: @Lot, @The Undiscovered Jew

    Zing!

  135. @ben tillman
    @The Undiscovered Jew


    They have no evidence Jews ethnically benefit from immigration except for MacDonald’s bogus history of immigration lobbying.

    According to Barry Mehler he distorted what his sources said about Jews and immigration lobbying to falsely imply Jews before WWII wanted multicultural immigration (the actual sources say they were limited to helping Jewish refugees escape persecution).
     
    How about a cite? I can't find anything from Mehler; all I can find are others referring to what he supposedly said about one cite by MacDonald to S.M. Neuringer, and all these references focus on one particular statement by MacDonald in The Culture of Critique about what Neuringer had to say.

    Whatever the merits of Mehler's criticism in that regard might be (although we can't tell since Neuringer's work is not available online), Mehler apparently had no problem with MacDonald's other attributions to Neuringer, such as:

    p. 259 -- "Jews have been "the single most persistent pressure group favoring a liberal immigration policy" in the United States in the entire immigration debate beginning in 1881 (Neuringer 1971, 392-393):


    In undertaking to sway immigration policy in a liberal direction, Jewish spokespersons and organizations demonstrated a degree of energy unsurpassed by any other interested pressure group. mmigration had constituted a prime object of concern for practically every Jewish defense and community relations organization.
     
    p. 261 -- ". . . the [American Jewish] Committee funded pro-immigration groups composed of non-Jews."

    p. 263 -- ". . . the opposition of Jewish organizations to any restrictions on immigration based on race or ethnicity can be traced back to the nineteenth century. Thus in 1882 the Jewish press was unanimous in its condemnation of the Chinese Exclusion Act."

    Replies: @Lot

    p. 259 — “Jews have been “the single most persistent pressure group favoring a liberal immigration policy” in the United States in the entire immigration debate beginning in 1881 (Neuringer 1971, 392-393):

    What does “Jews” mean here? Organized Jewish groups? No way they are the “most persistent pressure group” for immigration, that would be low wage employers and companies that sell a lot of crap to poor hispanics (e.g. Proctor and Gamble, not Tiffany). And looking only at ethnic groups, the ones who care primarily about immigration are the hispanic ones.

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    @Lot


    What does “Jews” mean here? Organized Jewish groups? No way they are the “most persistent pressure group” for immigration, that would be low wage employers and companies that sell a lot of crap to poor hispanics....
     
    "Are"? No one said anything about "are"!. It's "have been" -- since 1881.

    Back then, there weren't any "companies that [sold] a lot of crap to poor hispanics". Now, of course, we have a race to the bottom, with unscrupulous people exploiting the situation and ordinary people just trying to make ends meet, but the organized Jewish community continues its persistent pro-immigration stance, while others just play the hand they're dealt.

    Replies: @Lot

  136. @Jack D

    This characterization of Trump’s rhetoric reveals more about the momentum of the conventional wisdom—anything other than Open Borders is Hitlerism—than it does about the candidate.

     

    It is very characteristic of ideological regimes that are on the ropes that as your position becomes more and more tenuous, you insist on ideological purity even more. If you allow even one whisker of the camel's nose into your tent then the whole camel may follow, and you can see that the camel is not far away any more but he is right there pushing on your tent flaps . The Inquisition really got going once the position of the church was threatened by the Reformation. The Chinese Communist Party is cracking down on dissent now, because they realize that their legitimacy is in question. They view Gorbachev's perestroika as an object lesson in what NOT to do.

    So the desperate measures (such as no longer maintaining even a pretense of objectivity in the news pages) are a sign of weakness, not strength.

    Replies: @res, @whorefinder, @AndrewR

    >So the desperate measures (such as no longer maintaining even a pretense of objectivity in the news pages) are a sign of weakness, not strength.

    In practice, is there a difference between actions taken out of desperation and actions taken out of total dominance?

    In other words, does an elite that resorts to these desperate measures as a Hail Mary last resort necessarily look different from an elite that resorts to extreme measures due to having complete hegemony and no possibility of being held accountable for their actions?

    • Replies: @rod1963
    @AndrewR

    The press hasn't been held accountable in a very long time. It wasn't until the internet that people could hold them accountable for their endless lies and deceptions and they did that by not reading the papers and weeklies that defined the old guard establishment mouthpieces. And most are dead today, the few that hang on like the NYT, LAT and others they are all bleeding money because no one in their right mind reads those fish wrappers anymore. They are being kept alive by sugar daddies.

    Look at the way Drudge and Breitbart have grown.

  137. @Lot
    I followed your link in the article to The New Colossus, and was reminded that it is a remarkably beautiful poem. Circa 1883, when it was written, its sentiments were quite correct.

    Nobody writes this well anymore:

    Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
    With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
    Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
    A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
    Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
    Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
    The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

    "Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
    With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
     

    Replies: @vinteuil, @Anonymous, @Big Bill, @SPMoore8, @PiltdownMan, @boogerbently, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Kylie, @Njguy73, @SFG, @Olorin

    Lot, you really should have known this response was coming. How long have you been posting here? I’m not going to accuse you of trolling, though even Steve does it from time to time (remember the Otto Skorzeny-in-the-Mossad post?). Naah, man, you goofed.

    Emma Lazarus probably was writing on behalf of her coreligionists in Russia. Whether they were a plus or minus for America–well, you have to weigh a lot of bright people against a lot of leftists (with a lot of overlap), and which way you come out has a lot to do with your political views. On the one hand, polio vaccine, relativity, the Bomb, and Hollywood. On the other hand, Communism, feminism, anti-whitism, and Hollywood. I find it hard to believe there would be no Left without Jews–the factory workers were eventually going to want to do *something* about their awful conditions in the early Industrial Revolution. Similarly, segregation was really getting to be an embarrassment in the Cold War. But it would have taken another shape, and what that would be is impossible to guess. European countries with few Jews have a Left, and in many ways it is more effective than ours. I suspect the net effect in the USA might be to shift the Left from economic to cultural leftism (of which I personally do not approve). But–my guess, and that and .50 will buy you one of those cheap plastic toys from the dispensers in the supermarket. I feel your pain–make an account where you don’t out yourself as a hemi-Jew and advocate for immigration restriction–that Targets 2016 thing was a bloody good idea and I bet your ancestry is why everyone’s ignoring it. Go underground, rename and repackage it, and post about it on one of these weird alt-right sites. Hopefully they’ll be smart enough to also target all the sitting representatives who *aren’t* members of the tribe instead of just sending tasteless Holocaust tweets to the ten (or however many) Jews on the list.

    The overall Great Wave we probably did need to fill out the factories. Now we have more people than jobs, and illiterate immigrants aren’t inventing Google.

    The poem itself? On purely poetic grounds I kind of like it–the archaic (for our time) style pleases me, and it is inspiring. The sentiment itself is wrong for our time.

    • Replies: @Lot
    @SFG


    How long have you been posting here?
     
    I was a first-wave migrant from the old domain.

    I am probably the millennial who has been reading SS the longest, I remember reading his "Why Lesbians Aren't Gay" in print NR when I was about 13.

    Replies: @SFG

  138. The 1920’s immigration policy was a bad idea in retrospect. Absent its passage, probably another 300,000 or so Jews would have come from eastern europe in the 20’s and 30’s and perhaps another million in the 1940’s. Of that ~1.6 million, probably 1 million were killed in the Holocaust.

    WWII would have also been at least a little less vicious if some of Europe’s excess young people had come to the USA. And we would have defeated Nazi Germany sooner if we had greater manpower and Germany had fewer human resources to exploit for its defense.

    • Replies: @Hare Krishna
    @Lot

    Not only would no 1924 Immigration Act mean America could have taken advantage of all that European talent, but it would have meant a much whiter America. Every city in America would be majority white today with the possible exception of DC. Neighborhoods like Steve's family's home turf of Austin in Chicago would still be safe places. America would have much lower crime, and much less gun violence. It would have also meant less nonwhite immigration nowadays.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @Jack D

    , @anon
    @Lot

    You go from saying Jews don't push open borders for everywhere except Israel to pushing open borders.

    I think it's genetic.

  139. @SFG
    @Lot

    Lot, you really should have known this response was coming. How long have you been posting here? I'm not going to accuse you of trolling, though even Steve does it from time to time (remember the Otto Skorzeny-in-the-Mossad post?). Naah, man, you goofed.

    Emma Lazarus probably was writing on behalf of her coreligionists in Russia. Whether they were a plus or minus for America--well, you have to weigh a lot of bright people against a lot of leftists (with a lot of overlap), and which way you come out has a lot to do with your political views. On the one hand, polio vaccine, relativity, the Bomb, and Hollywood. On the other hand, Communism, feminism, anti-whitism, and Hollywood. I find it hard to believe there would be no Left without Jews--the factory workers were eventually going to want to do *something* about their awful conditions in the early Industrial Revolution. Similarly, segregation was really getting to be an embarrassment in the Cold War. But it would have taken another shape, and what that would be is impossible to guess. European countries with few Jews have a Left, and in many ways it is more effective than ours. I suspect the net effect in the USA might be to shift the Left from economic to cultural leftism (of which I personally do not approve). But--my guess, and that and .50 will buy you one of those cheap plastic toys from the dispensers in the supermarket. I feel your pain--make an account where you don't out yourself as a hemi-Jew and advocate for immigration restriction--that Targets 2016 thing was a bloody good idea and I bet your ancestry is why everyone's ignoring it. Go underground, rename and repackage it, and post about it on one of these weird alt-right sites. Hopefully they'll be smart enough to also target all the sitting representatives who *aren't* members of the tribe instead of just sending tasteless Holocaust tweets to the ten (or however many) Jews on the list.

    The overall Great Wave we probably did need to fill out the factories. Now we have more people than jobs, and illiterate immigrants aren't inventing Google.

    The poem itself? On purely poetic grounds I kind of like it--the archaic (for our time) style pleases me, and it is inspiring. The sentiment itself is wrong for our time.

    Replies: @Lot

    How long have you been posting here?

    I was a first-wave migrant from the old domain.

    I am probably the millennial who has been reading SS the longest, I remember reading his “Why Lesbians Aren’t Gay” in print NR when I was about 13.

    • Replies: @SFG
    @Lot

    Wow, you got me beat. I discovered him somewhere in the early 2000s after reading someone talking about 'evolutionary conservatives' and googling the term a year later.

  140. @Clyde
    @The Undiscovered Jew


    Lazarus in 1883 was addressing 19th century European immigration only. That form of immigration – despite the best efforts of many here to alienate the close to 100 million ethnic white Americans who are not ‘founding stock’ Anglo-Saxons – is in many important respects a completely separate issue from modern day non-European immigration.
     
    Good point and European immigration was the only kind there was and was the only kind imaginable back then. All changed in the 1965 Immigration Act which also was when Australia abandoned its White Australia immigration policies. Great Britain started admitting colonials. Emma Lazarus' poem was legitimate to put on the Statue of Liberty because America needed more people to labor away and fill this country up. Today we do not need unskilled third worlders, the robots are coming to eliminate jobs, so the plaque should be removed.
    Christian Arabs from the Levant are the only non-Europeans I can think of that were allowed in during the great wave before 1920

    Replies: @SPMoore8, @SFG

    Christian Arabs from the Levant : Don’t forget Armenians, my family was involved with that.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    @SPMoore8

    "Christian Arabs from the Levant : Don’t forget Armenians, my family was involved with that."

    You are Armenian?

    Replies: @SPMoore8

  141. @Paul Jolliffe
    Steve,

    We all love ya, but honest to God, give it a rest when it comes to JFK's assassination. You don't know shit.

    Don't trot out that stupid Jackie quote, either. She sure didn't mean it for long, and she probably didn't even really say it.

    We all get it. You can't criticize the American Military Industrial Machine in its heyday in any way, and if it is implicated in the murder of the century, you turn off your brain. (Some of us can guess why it is your weak spot. Maybe even you've figured it out.)

    You stop "noticing".

    JFK wasn't "killed by a communist".

    He was murdered by his own National Security State, and every institution in America failed in its duty to tell the truth to the American people.

    You want evidence?

    How about this really simple recorded for all posterity example?

    Richard Russell (Warren Commission Member): "I don't believe any of that (single-shot) bullet business."

    President Lyndon Johnson: "Me neither."


    They didn't believe their own conclusions. No rational person should, either.

    Steve, what you choose to believe in your own head is your business. But pal, on this one, your on your own.

    Replies: @Dirk Dagger, @Charles Erwin Wilson

    No, Steve’s correct, it was Oswald. You’re a paranoid nut.

    • Replies: @JohnnyWalker123
    @Dirk Dagger

    Back and to the left.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MLc0udf_74

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Dirk Dagger, @AnotherDad

  142. @Stan Adams
    So last night an alligator snatched a two-year-old boy wading in a foot of water at Disney World's Seven Seas Lagoon. His mother and father couldn't pry him from the gator's jaws as he was dragged underwater. The cops are "hopeful" that they'll find his body.

    But we can all breathe a sigh of relief that at least the alligator is all right. We can all be thankful that the racist cops didn't shoot him, can't we? Because that would have been a real tragedy.

    Anyone in iSteveland own any Disney stock? How's it faring this week?

    Replies: @SPMoore8

    Last I heard they have killed half a dozen gators looking for the child inside of one of them. No luck so far, but they have said they are sure that the child is dead, which suggests they found some corporeal evidence. It’s a shockingly sad story, and rather unbelievable.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @SPMoore8

    Yeah, that and our fellow citizen Omar's recent night out are gonna put a big crimp in Florida's tourist business.

    Replies: @SPMoore8

  143. @SPMoore8
    @Lot

    Okay, I respect your judgment, but if you like rhythmic alliterative sonnets, you can't do better than Hopkins (he was a priest, but just ignore that.)


    THE WORLD is charged with the grandeur of God.
    It will flame out, like shining from shook foil;
    It gathers to a greatness, like the ooze of oil
    Crushed. Why do men then now not reck his rod?
    Generations have trod, have trod, have trod; 5
    And all is seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil;
    And wears man’s smudge and shares man’s smell: the soil
    Is bare now, nor can foot feel, being shod.

    And for all this, nature is never spent;
    There lives the dearest freshness deep down things; 10
    And though the last lights off the black West went
    Oh, morning, at the brown brink eastward, springs—
    Because the Holy Ghost over the bent
    World broods with warm breast and with ah! bright wings.
     
    and

    I CAUGHT this morning morning’s minion, king-
    dom of daylight’s dauphin, dapple-dawn-drawn Falcon, in his riding
    Of the rolling level underneath him steady air, and striding
    High there, how he rung upon the rein of a wimpling wing
    In his ecstasy! then off, off forth on swing, 5
    As a skate’s heel sweeps smooth on a bow-bend: the hurl and gliding
    Rebuffed the big wind. My heart in hiding
    Stirred for a bird,—the achieve of; the mastery of the thing!

    Brute beauty and valour and act, oh, air, pride, plume, here
    Buckle! AND the fire that breaks from thee then, a billion 10
    Times told lovelier, more dangerous, O my chevalier!

    No wonder of it: shéer plód makes plough down sillion
    Shine, and blue-bleak embers, ah my dear,
    Fall, gall themselves, and gash gold-vermillion.
     

    Replies: @Kylie, @Lot

    Okay, I respect your judgment, but if you like rhythmic alliterative sonnets, you can’t do better than Hopkins

    I do, and Hopkins is on my top 10 list for sure, maybe top 5.

    Hopkins however overuses extremely obscure words. In your excerpt you have the word “sillion.” From the context and sound it probably means “soil,” but it interrupts the flow of reading to use such words so often.

    Looking the word up, it turns out that the word is “Revived by Gerard Manley Hopkins in 1877” and almost every use of the word on the internet cites Hopkins.

    And right before this he uses “wimpling” which at best an educating reader would guess mean to manufacture a wimple or the act of placing one on a nun.

    Wimple as a noun is already is borderline obscure, but turning it into a verb?

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    @Lot

    I think Hopkins means it in the sense of appearing like a wimple in its movement. (In the sense of "The Flying Nun" -- I wonder if that show was inspired by Hopkins.) I read a lot of poetry as a child, including the late Victorians, that's why I immediately thought of Tennyson and Browning earlier. But Hopkins is the most psychedelic poet I have ever read, as a child of the '60's.

    Since I am responding on this point, I would say: I don't think there's any reason for anyone to wimple their wings over statements like 1. Emma Lazarus was thinking of Russian Jews when she wrote her poem (because persecution of Jews in Russia got huge after the Tsar was assassinated in 1881), 2. That many Jews, sometimes, apparently illogically, support immigration in general because of their refugee history from about 1881 throughout the 20th Century, 3. That Emma was a Zionist avant la lettre, because she was, or 4. that Jews at times support immigration because they think they will be safer in a more "diverse" polity (I have heard this in convo several times.) I don't take any of this derogation of Jews, just trying to address some of the political and cultural complexity involved in these attitudes. By the same token, I know other immigrants from the late 19th and early 20th C. who have a similar attitude about Open Borders. However, virtually of them that I personally know (including Jewish people) have changed their minds in the past 15 years.

    BTW, in re: early Zionism, Emma was kind of cute but Israel Zangwill was a very talented guy. Worth looking up.

  144. @SPMoore8
    @Clyde

    Christian Arabs from the Levant : Don't forget Armenians, my family was involved with that.

    Replies: @Jefferson

    “Christian Arabs from the Levant : Don’t forget Armenians, my family was involved with that.”

    You are Armenian?

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    @Jefferson

    No Armenians in my tree that I know of. But my ancestors were involved in various charitable activities and that included, turn of the century, sponsoring Armenian refugees pre-WWI. I have news articles and some touching family stories.

    I often think that now that my own family has been raised I should get involved in something charitable, also. I mean, besides contributing to this blog.

  145. @Lot
    @SFG


    How long have you been posting here?
     
    I was a first-wave migrant from the old domain.

    I am probably the millennial who has been reading SS the longest, I remember reading his "Why Lesbians Aren't Gay" in print NR when I was about 13.

    Replies: @SFG

    Wow, you got me beat. I discovered him somewhere in the early 2000s after reading someone talking about ‘evolutionary conservatives’ and googling the term a year later.

  146. @Dave Pinsen
    @Kylie

    Viktor Frankl, or (((Viktor Frankl))), to save you the Wikipedia search, suggested a Statue of Responsibility be built on the West Coast.

    The poem is both florid and well-written. Sure, it sounds cliched now, but that inevitably comes when something is quoted or referred to so many times.

    Replies: @Kylie, @guest

    Only a small part of it is quoted endlessly. We’re not confronted with a “familiarity breeds contempt” situation here, like with the Mona Lisa. The less known part isn’t better. There are a lot of florid poems that’re actually good; go read some of the so-called metaphysical poets, for instance.

  147. @Lot
    @SPMoore8


    Okay, I respect your judgment, but if you like rhythmic alliterative sonnets, you can’t do better than Hopkins
     
    I do, and Hopkins is on my top 10 list for sure, maybe top 5.

    Hopkins however overuses extremely obscure words. In your excerpt you have the word "sillion." From the context and sound it probably means "soil," but it interrupts the flow of reading to use such words so often.

    Looking the word up, it turns out that the word is "Revived by Gerard Manley Hopkins in 1877" and almost every use of the word on the internet cites Hopkins.

    And right before this he uses "wimpling" which at best an educating reader would guess mean to manufacture a wimple or the act of placing one on a nun.

    Wimple as a noun is already is borderline obscure, but turning it into a verb?

    Replies: @SPMoore8

    I think Hopkins means it in the sense of appearing like a wimple in its movement. (In the sense of “The Flying Nun” — I wonder if that show was inspired by Hopkins.) I read a lot of poetry as a child, including the late Victorians, that’s why I immediately thought of Tennyson and Browning earlier. But Hopkins is the most psychedelic poet I have ever read, as a child of the ’60’s.

    Since I am responding on this point, I would say: I don’t think there’s any reason for anyone to wimple their wings over statements like 1. Emma Lazarus was thinking of Russian Jews when she wrote her poem (because persecution of Jews in Russia got huge after the Tsar was assassinated in 1881), 2. That many Jews, sometimes, apparently illogically, support immigration in general because of their refugee history from about 1881 throughout the 20th Century, 3. That Emma was a Zionist avant la lettre, because she was, or 4. that Jews at times support immigration because they think they will be safer in a more “diverse” polity (I have heard this in convo several times.) I don’t take any of this derogation of Jews, just trying to address some of the political and cultural complexity involved in these attitudes. By the same token, I know other immigrants from the late 19th and early 20th C. who have a similar attitude about Open Borders. However, virtually of them that I personally know (including Jewish people) have changed their minds in the past 15 years.

    BTW, in re: early Zionism, Emma was kind of cute but Israel Zangwill was a very talented guy. Worth looking up.

  148. @Flip
    @Crawfurdmuir

    Interesting that he was of French and Dutch ancestry rather than English and still felt this way.

    Replies: @Crawfurdmuir, @Discard

    Interesting that he was of French and Dutch ancestry rather than English and still felt this way.

    When we use the phrase “white Anglo-Saxon Protestant” or its acronym WASP we should remember how its originator Digby Baltzell used it. He didn’t exclude people of Dutch or Huguenot ancestry (or Scots or Germans, for that matter) who were parts of colonial society, and intermarried with the predominantly English population of the thirteen colonies. It was more an identification by shared cultural heritage descending from 17th-century colonial settlement and upper-middle to upper class social status than a strictly genealogical definition. That Jay could describe the American population at the time of the Revolution as one united people descended from the same ancestors reflects how well established the identification already had become by then.

    We might ask what could be WASPier than “The 400” – the cream of 19th century society, so called because 400 people could fit in the ballroom of Mrs. Astor’s New York mansion. Yet Mrs. Astor’s maiden name was Schermerhorn, which was Dutch, while Mr. Astor was of German ancestry, and the society journalist who coined the phrase “The 400” was Ward McAllister, was of Scottish descent.

    People of these national origins were present in 18th-century England as well as its colonies, and sometimes reached the heights of English society. They were in any event all drawn from a relatively small area of northwestern Europe and shared very similar genetic characteristics.

    • Replies: @Clyde
    @Crawfurdmuir

    erudite

  149. @SPMoore8
    @Stan Adams

    Last I heard they have killed half a dozen gators looking for the child inside of one of them. No luck so far, but they have said they are sure that the child is dead, which suggests they found some corporeal evidence. It's a shockingly sad story, and rather unbelievable.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

    Yeah, that and our fellow citizen Omar’s recent night out are gonna put a big crimp in Florida’s tourist business.

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    @Jim Don Bob

    Just as a mournful followup: They found the little kid, intact, and not far from where he was grabbed. So that makes one kid killed by a wild animal, one pop star slain, and almost a hundred people killed or wounded in Orlando. Bad, bad scene.

    Replies: @Jefferson

  150. @Jefferson
    @SPMoore8

    "Christian Arabs from the Levant : Don’t forget Armenians, my family was involved with that."

    You are Armenian?

    Replies: @SPMoore8

    No Armenians in my tree that I know of. But my ancestors were involved in various charitable activities and that included, turn of the century, sponsoring Armenian refugees pre-WWI. I have news articles and some touching family stories.

    I often think that now that my own family has been raised I should get involved in something charitable, also. I mean, besides contributing to this blog.

  151. @The Undiscovered Jew
    Forgive me for interrupting the standard blood libeling (I sympathize deeply with how Steve relies on them for tipjar income) but Lazarus in 1883 was addressing 19th century European immigration only. That form of immigration - despite the best efforts of many here to alienate the close to 100 million ethnic white Americans who are not 'founding stock' Anglo-Saxons - is in many important respects a completely separate issue from modern day non-European immigration.

    Polish, Italian, Greek, and Great Wave descended Irish Americans also find the poem very touching because it was meant as a tribute to them. But there's little tipjar money to be raised from pointing that out, right Steveo?

    Replies: @Clyde, @Dave Pinsen, @ben tillman, @grmbl

    What do you want from Steve? Should he apologize? Should he admit that he knew all along that MacDonald is a fraud?

    He can’t and won’t do that. A big part of iSteve ideology is the idea that Jews have supplanted WASPs as the ruling caste of America, that they are Israel-firsters, that they harm the American people by pushing for more third-world immigration, that they demoralize and depress gentiles for competitive advantage by means of memorializing the Holocaust, and so on and so forth. The Jew as parasite sucking the lifeblood out of the host nation. This draws much of his readership (although he deletes many of their most hateful comments every day.)

    Because Steve’s brand of antisemitism is not the torches-and-pitchfork kind, not genocidal, he claims that he is not an antisemite. Ultimately no one can know what he really believes. Maybe it’s never been more than a coldly calculated cynical ploy to cultivate some of the fertile ground left untilled by Stormfront.

    • Replies: @anon
    @grmbl

    Ultimately no one can know what he really believes.

    Nice to see that that doesn't stop you from calling him an anti-Semite anyway.

    , @Charles Erwin Wilson
    @grmbl

    Well well, aren't you the cynical bastard? Ascribing a suppressed, but vile, "light up the ovens" antisemitism to Steve on the basis that you think he really would like to embrace his inner Himmler, but does not do so for business reasons. If Steve shared his true preferences, what do you think they would be?

    Replies: @grmbl

    , @The Undiscovered Jew
    @grmbl

    What do you want from Steve? Should he apologize? Should he admit that he knew all along that MacDonald is a fraud?

    He can’t and won’t do that.


    He doesn't have to.

    But if he and others are going to base 90% of their arguments on the word of this fool, MacDonald, and if MacDonald can be refuted simply by pointing out he played games with his own evidence, then they should expect to be countered when they make these allegations.

    The smart thing would be to stop driving the issue, but if they insist on playing a losing hand...

    Replies: @grmbl

    , @anon
    @grmbl

    You people are insane.

    I advise everyone to read MacDonald and make their own mind up.

    Replies: @The Undiscovered Jew

  152. Democratic strategist Robert Zimmerman told Megyn Kelly today that not letting in more Muslim refugees into The U.S will endanger Americans. He said refusing to let in more Muslim refugees into The U.S is a recruitment tool for ISIS.

    That is like saying America’s unemployment rate will skyrocket if we don’t have open borders.

    By the way the vast majority of Muslims do not like people who belong to an ethnic group with the last name Zimmerman. It reminds them too much of Israel. Yet this guy from the Chosen tribe wants to turn the country into The United States Of Americastan. He wants to live in a America where one day Muhammad/Mohammad is the most common male name, like it is in Londonstan. Catholic Latinos are not destroying America at a rapid fast enough pace for his liking.

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
    @Jefferson


    Democratic strategist Robert Zimmerman told Megyn Kelly today that not letting in more Muslim refugees into The U.S will endanger Americans.
     
    I been a fan of his for decades, but on this point, Bob Dylan is simply wrong.
  153. @grmbl
    @The Undiscovered Jew

    What do you want from Steve? Should he apologize? Should he admit that he knew all along that MacDonald is a fraud?

    He can't and won't do that. A big part of iSteve ideology is the idea that Jews have supplanted WASPs as the ruling caste of America, that they are Israel-firsters, that they harm the American people by pushing for more third-world immigration, that they demoralize and depress gentiles for competitive advantage by means of memorializing the Holocaust, and so on and so forth. The Jew as parasite sucking the lifeblood out of the host nation. This draws much of his readership (although he deletes many of their most hateful comments every day.)

    Because Steve's brand of antisemitism is not the torches-and-pitchfork kind, not genocidal, he claims that he is not an antisemite. Ultimately no one can know what he really believes. Maybe it's never been more than a coldly calculated cynical ploy to cultivate some of the fertile ground left untilled by Stormfront.

    Replies: @anon, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @The Undiscovered Jew, @anon

    Ultimately no one can know what he really believes.

    Nice to see that that doesn’t stop you from calling him an anti-Semite anyway.

  154. @Travis
    The Democrats, Oligarchs and the media have demonstrated the fear they have of a Trump Presidency. The focus has been more Anti-Trump since the terrorist attack than ever before.

    If muslim immigrants benefit Americans, why has the current administration stopped 98% of muslims who wanted to immigrate from entering our borders. Over the last 8 years 100 million would have immigrated if we allowed them to come. Even Obama was not foolish enough to accept more than 2% of the potential muslim immigrants.

    It seems to media and politicians fail to mention this fact. Do the American people realize that hundreds of millions of Muslims would immigrate if given the opportunity. Hillary needs to answer the question, how many muslims should we accept into our nation over the next 4 years ? President Obama accepted 4 million. Should we increase it to 5 million or reduce it to less than 1 million. why have a visa lottery in Muslim nations when most Western nations are denied this opportunity ?

    Replies: @Honorary Thief

    I hope this becomes a popular line of discussion on the Alt-Right. It would be devestating if Trump used it on Hillary.

  155. @iSteveFan
    @Dave Pinsen

    Wasn't the actual wretched refuse identified on Ellis Island and then deported back whence they had come?

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    Right.

  156. SFG says:
    @Clyde
    @The Undiscovered Jew


    Lazarus in 1883 was addressing 19th century European immigration only. That form of immigration – despite the best efforts of many here to alienate the close to 100 million ethnic white Americans who are not ‘founding stock’ Anglo-Saxons – is in many important respects a completely separate issue from modern day non-European immigration.
     
    Good point and European immigration was the only kind there was and was the only kind imaginable back then. All changed in the 1965 Immigration Act which also was when Australia abandoned its White Australia immigration policies. Great Britain started admitting colonials. Emma Lazarus' poem was legitimate to put on the Statue of Liberty because America needed more people to labor away and fill this country up. Today we do not need unskilled third worlders, the robots are coming to eliminate jobs, so the plaque should be removed.
    Christian Arabs from the Levant are the only non-Europeans I can think of that were allowed in during the great wave before 1920

    Replies: @SPMoore8, @SFG

    Yeah, it was legitimate back then. There’s no reason you have to hold the same immigration policy all the time. It should vary depending on the needs of the target country.

    But even if Trump wins, I’m in favor of letting the plaque remain and turn green. There’s something to be said for letting remnants of the past’s ideologies hang around, if only so people realize that their forebears didn’t think the same way they did. These attempts to turn Alexander Hamilton into a modern-day SJW are really, really silly.

  157. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “…You are supposed to believe that this argument that it’s too late to change so don’t even think about it has nothing at all to do with powerful and influential people trying to evade responsibility for bad decisions they’ve made in the past.”

    Don’t worry your pretty little head about it. Just lie back and enjoy it.

  158. If you can’t grok “founding American stock”, you’re part of the problem, not part of the solution.

  159. @Lot
    @ben tillman


    p. 259 — “Jews have been “the single most persistent pressure group favoring a liberal immigration policy” in the United States in the entire immigration debate beginning in 1881 (Neuringer 1971, 392-393):
     
    What does "Jews" mean here? Organized Jewish groups? No way they are the "most persistent pressure group" for immigration, that would be low wage employers and companies that sell a lot of crap to poor hispanics (e.g. Proctor and Gamble, not Tiffany). And looking only at ethnic groups, the ones who care primarily about immigration are the hispanic ones.

    Replies: @ben tillman

    What does “Jews” mean here? Organized Jewish groups? No way they are the “most persistent pressure group” for immigration, that would be low wage employers and companies that sell a lot of crap to poor hispanics….

    “Are”? No one said anything about “are”!. It’s “have been” — since 1881.

    Back then, there weren’t any “companies that [sold] a lot of crap to poor hispanics”. Now, of course, we have a race to the bottom, with unscrupulous people exploiting the situation and ordinary people just trying to make ends meet, but the organized Jewish community continues its persistent pro-immigration stance, while others just play the hand they’re dealt.

    • Replies: @Lot
    @ben tillman

    So in a hypothetical judenfrei USA, we never had mass immigration? Really?

    Sorry bud, but white gentiles have always been happy to sell out their brothers and their grandchildren to make a quick buck with cheap non-white labor. It wasn't the Jews who brought blacks to America, it wasn't Jews who freed them, and it is not the Jews who own most of the Central Valley Farms and other Big Ag industries that, relative to their economic size, are the single biggest promoters of low-IQ peasant immigration to the United States.

    It was an anti-semite, Henry Ford, who was most responsible for bringing southern blacks up north in place of the German and Eastern European immigrants that traditionally worked in northern factories. Immigration from Europe, as I noted before, had reduced the non-white share of the United States from 20% in 1830 to 10% in 1930. It was, in part, anti-semites and Nordicists who shut that process down.

    Jews are far from innocent in these matters, and I will not argue against the claim that we have a disproportionate share of the responsibility for the degradation of the American stock.

    Replies: @Perspective, @The Undiscovered Jew, @anon

  160. @Jim Don Bob
    @SPMoore8

    Yeah, that and our fellow citizen Omar's recent night out are gonna put a big crimp in Florida's tourist business.

    Replies: @SPMoore8

    Just as a mournful followup: They found the little kid, intact, and not far from where he was grabbed. So that makes one kid killed by a wild animal, one pop star slain, and almost a hundred people killed or wounded in Orlando. Bad, bad scene.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    @SPMoore8

    "Just as a mournful followup: They found the little kid, intact, and not far from where he was grabbed. So that makes one kid killed by a wild animal, one pop star slain, and almost a hundred people killed or wounded in Orlando. Bad, bad scene."

    Like I said in another blog, this is the worst week ever for Orlando. The bad in Orlando came in threes.

  161. @Crawfurdmuir
    @Flip


    Interesting that he was of French and Dutch ancestry rather than English and still felt this way.
     
    When we use the phrase "white Anglo-Saxon Protestant" or its acronym WASP we should remember how its originator Digby Baltzell used it. He didn't exclude people of Dutch or Huguenot ancestry (or Scots or Germans, for that matter) who were parts of colonial society, and intermarried with the predominantly English population of the thirteen colonies. It was more an identification by shared cultural heritage descending from 17th-century colonial settlement and upper-middle to upper class social status than a strictly genealogical definition. That Jay could describe the American population at the time of the Revolution as one united people descended from the same ancestors reflects how well established the identification already had become by then.

    We might ask what could be WASPier than "The 400" - the cream of 19th century society, so called because 400 people could fit in the ballroom of Mrs. Astor's New York mansion. Yet Mrs. Astor's maiden name was Schermerhorn, which was Dutch, while Mr. Astor was of German ancestry, and the society journalist who coined the phrase "The 400" was Ward McAllister, was of Scottish descent.

    People of these national origins were present in 18th-century England as well as its colonies, and sometimes reached the heights of English society. They were in any event all drawn from a relatively small area of northwestern Europe and shared very similar genetic characteristics.

    Replies: @Clyde

    erudite

  162. @Paul Jolliffe
    Steve,

    We all love ya, but honest to God, give it a rest when it comes to JFK's assassination. You don't know shit.

    Don't trot out that stupid Jackie quote, either. She sure didn't mean it for long, and she probably didn't even really say it.

    We all get it. You can't criticize the American Military Industrial Machine in its heyday in any way, and if it is implicated in the murder of the century, you turn off your brain. (Some of us can guess why it is your weak spot. Maybe even you've figured it out.)

    You stop "noticing".

    JFK wasn't "killed by a communist".

    He was murdered by his own National Security State, and every institution in America failed in its duty to tell the truth to the American people.

    You want evidence?

    How about this really simple recorded for all posterity example?

    Richard Russell (Warren Commission Member): "I don't believe any of that (single-shot) bullet business."

    President Lyndon Johnson: "Me neither."


    They didn't believe their own conclusions. No rational person should, either.

    Steve, what you choose to believe in your own head is your business. But pal, on this one, your on your own.

    Replies: @Dirk Dagger, @Charles Erwin Wilson

    Nice of you to pop your head up out of the fever swamps to post. From Aaron Burr’s departure, until Bill Clinton’s arrival, LBJ was the most dishonest, self-serving, short-sighted politician in American history. And you quote LBJ to support your position.

    Oswald was a Castro-supporting Communist traitor, who murdered the last great Democrat president. The notion that an inept “American Military Industrial Machine” could perpetrate the fraud you claim is not just absurd, it is obtuse. Grow up, and turn your back on the leftist propaganda of the people that brought you the Vietnam ‘war’.

  163. There are ten countries where gays get the death penalty, none of them are ‘white’.

    Here are the 10 countries where homosexuality may be punished by death

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/06/13/here-are-the-10-countries-where-homosexuality-may-be-punished-by-death-2/

  164. @grmbl
    @The Undiscovered Jew

    What do you want from Steve? Should he apologize? Should he admit that he knew all along that MacDonald is a fraud?

    He can't and won't do that. A big part of iSteve ideology is the idea that Jews have supplanted WASPs as the ruling caste of America, that they are Israel-firsters, that they harm the American people by pushing for more third-world immigration, that they demoralize and depress gentiles for competitive advantage by means of memorializing the Holocaust, and so on and so forth. The Jew as parasite sucking the lifeblood out of the host nation. This draws much of his readership (although he deletes many of their most hateful comments every day.)

    Because Steve's brand of antisemitism is not the torches-and-pitchfork kind, not genocidal, he claims that he is not an antisemite. Ultimately no one can know what he really believes. Maybe it's never been more than a coldly calculated cynical ploy to cultivate some of the fertile ground left untilled by Stormfront.

    Replies: @anon, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @The Undiscovered Jew, @anon

    Well well, aren’t you the cynical bastard? Ascribing a suppressed, but vile, “light up the ovens” antisemitism to Steve on the basis that you think he really would like to embrace his inner Himmler, but does not do so for business reasons. If Steve shared his true preferences, what do you think they would be?

    • Replies: @grmbl
    @Charles Erwin Wilson

    Read what I wrote again. For all I know, in his heart of hearts Steve is completely indifferent to Jews. With a sufficiently creative imagination, you could even posit that he is secretly philosemitic but broadcasts his style of late 19th-century antisemitism because he wants to draw susceptible people away from the more hardcore kind. Being a "cynical bastard" myself, I lean towards a more commercial explanation.

    Replies: @anon

  165. @Lot
    @Kylie

    I agree that Powell's Rivers of Blood speech was extremely good. It was also 5 decades ago by a man with the sort of classical education elites no longer receive except for the less than 1 in 1000 who get a graduate degree in classics or ancient history.

    It makes me sad to think the West no longer has any men of such caliber.

    http://www.vdare.com/articles/like-the-roman-i-seem-to-see-the-river-tiber-foaming-with-much-blood

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

    Replies: @MC, @Kylie, @Clyde, @PiltdownMan

    While Enoch Powell indeed grew up in a time when a classical education was part of the normal school curriculum in Britain and the United States, it’s worth noting that he was a top classics scholar at Cambridge, achieving an undergraduate double first, which is an about a once-in-a-decade kind of achievement.

  166. @SPMoore8
    @Jim Don Bob

    Just as a mournful followup: They found the little kid, intact, and not far from where he was grabbed. So that makes one kid killed by a wild animal, one pop star slain, and almost a hundred people killed or wounded in Orlando. Bad, bad scene.

    Replies: @Jefferson

    “Just as a mournful followup: They found the little kid, intact, and not far from where he was grabbed. So that makes one kid killed by a wild animal, one pop star slain, and almost a hundred people killed or wounded in Orlando. Bad, bad scene.”

    Like I said in another blog, this is the worst week ever for Orlando. The bad in Orlando came in threes.

  167. @Lot
    @SPMoore8

    I've read plenty of both and it stands with them. Obviously the public thought so as it is very well liked.

    It is very well rhymed, metered, and alliterated. I like

    astride from land to land;

    sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand

    whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning
    her name
    Mother of Exiles.

    world-wide welcome;

    wretched refuse ... teeming tempest-tost to me,

    lift my lamp

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @SPMoore8, @Chrisnonymous

    You have valid points.

    It’s not terrible, but I have to agree with the commenter who said the last 5 lines are, unfortunately, the stand-out section of the poem. The first 9, as you say, are well-rhymed, etc, but, particularly when read aloud, they are clunky, slightly cliched, and the lines don’t all break well. For example,

    Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
    almost crosses the line from alliteration to tongue-twister.

    cries she / With silent lips
    groan!

    shall stand / A mighty woman with a torch
    works well as “stand” sets up a question we want to have answered (since the sentence subject is positioned after the verb) and answers it satisfyingly. But
    whose flame / Is the imprisoned lightning
    doesn’t work. We don’t care about the flame, and “is the imprisoned lightning” is just filler–nice imagery, but with no point in the poem.

    “The imprisoned lightning” captures the poem’s main artistic defect, which is that there is too much filler, especially the clause beginning “her mild eyes”. Lazarus already referenced the statue’s geographical location; she’s doing it again because she didn’t have a better idea for something to follow up the glowing beacon of welcome. Moreover, as Dave Pinsen points out, the Brooklyn Bridge doesn’t even really go over the harbor. Some of her verbiage needs to be Ezra-Pound-ed into submission.

    In terms of content, while I generally dismiss claims of Jewish influence, in the case of this poem, it is quite clear that the poem intentionally re-purposes the statue from a celebration of freedom to a welcome specifically to Jews, announcing the USA as a new Jewish homeland. The original Colossus of Rhodes’ dedication poem starts referencing the sun, the brazenness of the statue, and waves. Lazarus gives us “brazen” and “sea-washed sunset gates”, establishing that her poem parallels the original Greek dedication.

    The original Colossus’ Greek dedication then talks about kindling the torch of freedom and independence, but does Lazarus give us a parallel freedom torch in her poem? No, her torch is simply a beacon to follow, rather like the pillar of fire that the Israelites followed to the promised land.

    Does the poem ask for the poor and huddle masses? Yes, but it also identifies the homeless, tempest-tost and calls the statue the Mother of Exiles… Were the poor of Europe homeless and exiled? No, but of course Jewish people were.

    The poem ends with the “golden door” to the USA. What is this golden door, this poem’s culmination, this strange imagery that we never notice because we stop paying attention after “breathe free”? I think given the propensity for religious imagery in 19th century America, we can say quite certainly that it is Jerusalem’s Gate of Mercy, which is also called the Golden Gate, one with Messianic importance for Jews.

    The imagery of the poem could be dismissed if it weren’t for the fact that Emma Lazarus was strongly concerned with the problem of Jews as eternal exiles and was a proponent of a Jewish homeland.

    The original Greek Colossus’ dedication ends saying that the sea and land belong to the descendants of Hercules (in the vein of “to us and our posterity”) while Lazarus’ dedication ends saying that the land should be populated by foreigners who enter through the שער הרחמים. It is quite clear that Lazarus intended her dedication to envision not a statue to celebrate the homeland of its natives but a statue to collect and create a new homeland for Jews.

    And that brings us to my major objection to the poem, which is not actually its art or its Zionism, but the way that, in acting as an intentional inversion of the original Greek dedication poem, it asks us to see the Statue of Liberty as a feminist, pacifist, “cuck” symbol.

    While the Greek dedication praises the people for crowning their city with the spoils of an enemy who attacked them, Lazarus poem begins with the double-entendre of “brazen”, suggesting the Greeks were shameless in celebrating their military victory. It then continues with the original complaint of “manspreading”, comparing the Colossus’ spread legs to the Greeks’ shameless military bravado, and saying that the USA would not have this masculine symbol, but instead “a mighty woman”, a “Mother”. And what will this mother do? Will she take care of us, her children? No, she’ll take care of the children of other nations, and we should praise her for it.

    I don’t hate the Statue of Liberty, as I don’t entirely hate past immigration to the US. However, I don’t like Lazarus’ poem, and I think the statue ought to be a symbol of American liberty as an example to the world, not a symbol of American largesse as a right of the world.

    I think these lines are appropos today:

    O Liberty, white Goddess! is it well
    To leave the gates unguarded? On thy breast
    Fold Sorrow’s children, soothe the hurts of fate,
    Lift the down-trodden, but with hand of steel
    Stay those who to thy sacred portals come
    To waste the gifts of freedom.

    The whole poem is worth reading…
    http://www.bartleby.com/248/689.html

  168. @Jefferson
    Democratic strategist Robert Zimmerman told Megyn Kelly today that not letting in more Muslim refugees into The U.S will endanger Americans. He said refusing to let in more Muslim refugees into The U.S is a recruitment tool for ISIS.

    That is like saying America's unemployment rate will skyrocket if we don't have open borders.

    By the way the vast majority of Muslims do not like people who belong to an ethnic group with the last name Zimmerman. It reminds them too much of Israel. Yet this guy from the Chosen tribe wants to turn the country into The United States Of Americastan. He wants to live in a America where one day Muhammad/Mohammad is the most common male name, like it is in Londonstan. Catholic Latinos are not destroying America at a rapid fast enough pace for his liking.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan

    Democratic strategist Robert Zimmerman told Megyn Kelly today that not letting in more Muslim refugees into The U.S will endanger Americans.

    I been a fan of his for decades, but on this point, Bob Dylan is simply wrong.

    • Agree: ben tillman
  169. @Dirk Dagger
    @Paul Jolliffe

    No, Steve's correct, it was Oswald. You're a paranoid nut.

    Replies: @JohnnyWalker123

    Back and to the left.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @JohnnyWalker123

    The whole "Back and to the left" argument is spurious. If you study the Zapruder frames a bit more closely you will see JFKs head push forward upon impact just as you would expect if shot from behind.

    The movie "JFK" while very entertaining is essentially a 3.5 hour continuous lie. Check out Dave Reitz's meticulously researched site JFK-100 page at http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100menu.html
    This thoroughly debunks Oliver Stone's (Jim Garrison's) nonsense. If Mark Lane, Charles Weiskopf, and Garrison could not find a single shred of proof of a conspiracy with subpoena power then what chance does Joe Sixpack have? when was the last time Dems and Repubs agreed on anything yet on the Warren Commission they agreed to perpetrate the crime of the century?! The conspiracy theorists spew their bile in pursuit of the almighty dollar.

    Other sources for truth regarding the JFK assassination:
    Reclaiming History by Bugliosi
    The Garrison Case (a study in the abuse of power) by M. Brener
    False Witness by P. Lambert
    American Grotesque by J. Kirkwood

    , @Dirk Dagger
    @JohnnyWalker123

    Stone? Ha. Feynman.

    , @AnotherDad
    @JohnnyWalker123


    Back and to the left.
     
    Sheer stupidity and sheer dishonesty.

    The physics of Kennedy's body jerking around, given it's contact--back, butt, feet--with a car that is in turn rolling down the highway is complicated.

    But his brain spilling out of his head in front of his ears--which is stone cold obvious from even these Hollyweird edited film clips--is not. This shot came from behind Kennedy. It absolutely positively did not come from the "grassy knoll".

    It was entirely *possible* for say the anti-Castro Cubans--feeling betrayed at the Bay of Pigs--or for the hothead Castro--mad at the Bay of Pigs and assassination attempts--or for the mob--worried about Robert Kennedy's investigation-- to have wanted Kennedy dead. But there's no evidence that any of them are *actually* behind his assassination.

    I had to listen to all this crap from my Irish-Catholic father growing up--every one of those conspiracy books read and regurgitated. But there's simply nothing to any of it. No evidence. Nothing contradicting the commie loony loser Oswald--with the Marine marksmanship badge--doing his thing and getting lucky. The evidence that the national security establishment had some sort of problem with the "pay any price, bear any burden" cold warrior Kennedy is also non-existent.

    Also ridiculous is all the utopian fawning that in losing Kennedy we somehow lost some golden age he would have led us into. Maybe--maybe--he done something different in Vietnam and the 60s would have been less contentious? Who knows? Maybe he'd have actually done *less* utopian Great Society crap than Johnson and we'd have been better off? Again who knows? Most of the destabilizing 60s was just baked into the cake--civil rights (and black dysfunction), the Jewish ascendancy (and anti-traditional propaganda), birth control pills, prosperity and spoiled boomer children. A true republic does not need any *particular* leader and does not swoon over one. In a republic it's the mass of responsible men taking care of their families that fundamentally chart the course and that course doesn't jump wildly around because of an assassins' bullet. Of course now ruled by a hostile anti-national elite, an imperial judiciary, anti-white minorities, silly feminine nonsense ... there is precious little "republic" left.
  170. Seth Myers, I guess is a comedian, but this sure sounds more like agitprop. He declares we need a “robust, independent press” as he decries commonsense immigration reform as “bigoted, scary racism.” I can’t believe this is on a major television network.

    Salon admits to Narrative Collapse in the Orlando Shooting, for Republicans, of course.

    http://www.salon.com/2016/06/14/the_narrative_falls_apart_evidence_that_omar_mateen_was_in_the_closet_undermines_gop_framing_of_the_orlando_shooting/

    • Replies: @anon
    @Clifford Brown

    Good old Amanda Marcotte.

    My favorite thing about the "He was just a self-loathing gay man!" meme is that its proponents tend to be the same people who, yesterday, were complaining that a guy on the FBI terrorist watch list was able to buy a gun.

    Imagine how lucky the FBI was that the ONE self-loathing gay man they investigated for ties to terrorism ended up killing a whole bunch of people for a reason totally unrelated to Islamic terrorism!

  171. @Jack D
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Emma Lazarus's ancestors arrived in the US before the American Revolution, probably before yours did.

    Replies: @AlphaSupremo, @SPMoore8, @Dirk Dagger, @iSteveFan, @woodNfish, @tbraton, @Yo Trump, @Chris Mallory, @Buzz Mohawk, @AnotherDad

    Your comment is irrelevant, but since you brought it up:

    My ancestors began arriving in America in the mid-1600’s. They were English Protestants who were among the earliest residents of New Haven, Connecticut.

    How’s that, Jack?

  172. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Clifford Brown
    Seth Myers, I guess is a comedian, but this sure sounds more like agitprop. He declares we need a "robust, independent press" as he decries commonsense immigration reform as "bigoted, scary racism." I can't believe this is on a major television network.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kygQLLhos5k

    Salon admits to Narrative Collapse in the Orlando Shooting, for Republicans, of course.

    http://www.salon.com/2016/06/14/the_narrative_falls_apart_evidence_that_omar_mateen_was_in_the_closet_undermines_gop_framing_of_the_orlando_shooting/

    Replies: @anon

    Good old Amanda Marcotte.

    My favorite thing about the “He was just a self-loathing gay man!” meme is that its proponents tend to be the same people who, yesterday, were complaining that a guy on the FBI terrorist watch list was able to buy a gun.

    Imagine how lucky the FBI was that the ONE self-loathing gay man they investigated for ties to terrorism ended up killing a whole bunch of people for a reason totally unrelated to Islamic terrorism!

  173. @candid_observer
    @JerryC

    I just about never engage in conspiracy theories, for the very basic reason that they are almost always wrong. But I have to say I'm just not believing that the results of the poll, and the reporting on them, could be close to the truth.

    Look, unbiased polls have shown that most Americans actually have supported Trump's idea of a temporary ban on Muslim immigration (which I honestly have a problem with, if it is an explicit religious test). This was before Orlando.

    After Orlando, the vast majority think his approach is just way wrong? After?

    Something just isn't right about this -- it fails basic sanity checks.

    Replies: @ben tillman, @candid_observer

    A Reuters 5-day running poll on the question:

    “Agree/Disagree: The United States should temporarily stop all Muslims from entering the United States.”

    now shows a 50-42 advantage to “agree” — a rather dramatic swing.

    http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/06/15/trumpism-winning-donald-trump-win/

    Since it’s a 5-day rolling poll, one would ordinarily expect that when all 5-days of polling are finally after Orlando, the swing would be even greater.

    So how can it be that in the CBS poll, supposedly only 25% of Americans approve of Trump’s approach to Orlando?

    I smell a rat.

  174. @JerryC
    Or maybe it's not so much of a nightmare for the establishment after all? The public seems to side with Obama over Trump on the issue by a rather large margin.

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/06/are-democrats-winning-political-battle-over-islamic-terror.php

    Perhaps The Megaphone is invincible after all?

    Replies: @candid_observer, @ben tillman, @Trumpenproleteriat

    A Reuter’s poll says that Trump rebounded on the 12th from a nosedive (following a week of spinning his judge comments) and is now within 8 points of Cankles.
    http://polling.reuters.com/#!poll/TM651Y15_13

    Where is Nate Silver when you need him

  175. @t
    OT: Pastor refuses to mourn Orlando victims: ‘The tragedy is that more of them didn’t die’ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/06/14/pastor-refuses-to-mourn-orlando-victims-the-tragedy-is-that-more-of-them-didnt-die/

    Who is this redneck?

    http://www.veritybaptist.com/pastor.html

    Pastor Roger Jimenez was born in Venezuela. His family came to Christ through the influence of American missionaries. He was led to the Lord by his father when he was 4 years old. His family moved to the United States when he was very young.

    Joann Jimenez was born in Northern California. At the age of 17 she was working full time and attending a local community college near Sacramento. The influence at this college had convinced her to be an atheist, even though she was raised somewhat catholic. Joann was saved when a Christian teenage boy, who had recently started working with her, began to present the gospel to her. After months of conversations and debating, late one night while closing, Joann decided to reject atheism and accepted the Lord Jesus Christ as her personal saviour! She immediately began to go to church with her Christian co-worker, got baptized and began to grow in her walk with God. Joann would later marry the young Christian co-worker that presented the gospel to her.

    Roger and Joann Jimenez have been happily married since June of 2004. The Lord has blessed them with wonderful children and they are praying that God will give them many more.

     

    Replies: @Discard

    I don’t mourn them either. This public “grief” is just political theater.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @Discard


    I don’t mourn them either. This public “grief” is just political theater.
     
    Me neither.

    My natural reaction toward gays is sort of eeeww. I have i think--who knows other minds?--normal standard issue "homo-aversion". I find it disgusting, utterly lacking the beauty and deep drama of biologically correct coupling. But my attitude toward gays was always--hey great, go do your gay thing ... over there.

    But in the last 20 or so gays have insisted--with Hollyweird obliging\promoting--of sticking their dysfunction in everyone else's face. And then in the last ten in positively browbeating people--mostly Christians--for simply declining to want to participate in cheering their gayness. A direct assault on basic freedom of association. (BTW, not writing that down explicitly is the big failure of the founding father's. Little could they imagine what sort of police state nonsense was in store.) In other words, gays have become not just crude, but rude, bossy and totalitarian. Screw 'em.

  176. @AndrewR
    @Jack D

    >So the desperate measures (such as no longer maintaining even a pretense of objectivity in the news pages) are a sign of weakness, not strength.

    In practice, is there a difference between actions taken out of desperation and actions taken out of total dominance?

    In other words, does an elite that resorts to these desperate measures as a Hail Mary last resort necessarily look different from an elite that resorts to extreme measures due to having complete hegemony and no possibility of being held accountable for their actions?

    Replies: @rod1963

    The press hasn’t been held accountable in a very long time. It wasn’t until the internet that people could hold them accountable for their endless lies and deceptions and they did that by not reading the papers and weeklies that defined the old guard establishment mouthpieces. And most are dead today, the few that hang on like the NYT, LAT and others they are all bleeding money because no one in their right mind reads those fish wrappers anymore. They are being kept alive by sugar daddies.

    Look at the way Drudge and Breitbart have grown.

  177. @Flip
    @Crawfurdmuir

    Interesting that he was of French and Dutch ancestry rather than English and still felt this way.

    Replies: @Crawfurdmuir, @Discard

    The King of England, (George III) was German at the time of the American Revolution. Before his grandfather (George I),took the throne, the previous King (William of Orange) was Dutch.

    I’d say the Founders accepted a certain amount of Northern European mixing. Moslems? I doubt it.

    • Replies: @Lot
    @Discard


    the previous King (William of Orange) was Dutch.
     
    Not too Dutch. His mother was the child of King Charles and his wife, whose parents in turn were the King of France and Marie de' Medici.
  178. The FACT is that 99.99999% of Muslim immigrants to both Europe and America do not committ terrorist acts and kill people. This is simply incontrovertible. Therefore, trying to argue that Muslims, as an entire religious group, should be prohibited from immigrating to the U.S as a deterrant to terrorist is asinine.

    And how nice of you, Sailer, to try to pass the 1924 Immigration Act as an anti-immigration bill. In reality, the primary argument for that Act was eugenicist, that southern Europeans such as Spaniards and Italians were biologically inferior to northern European stock, and that allowing large numbers of such immigrants would result in the deterioration of the genetic quality of the American people. This is a well-known historical fact. You know this very well, too. The problem is that it doesen’t fit your conservative misrepresentation of history, that presents the America of old as a country where all ethnicities except for blacks held the same social status as WASPS.

    And your comment about gay interior decorators in the Trump Towers was hilarious because it shows what a blowhard you are. Yes, gay men are more feminine than heterosexual men on average. Who cares? They tend to be far superior to straight men at everything: they are overrepresentated among the greatest thinkers and artists, are more productive, there is a much higher proportion of gay men who are university-educated, working in the professions and they committ far less homicides, etc.

    It is easy to diagnose the typical Trump voter: white, male, heterosexual and without a college education. That is, the people who have been the most disenfranchised in America over the past 50 years. But it is not the “system”, or “immigration” that is to blame here: no one is forcing white heterosexual males to not try to earn an education, to be indolent and to get drunk on cheap beer every day instead of bettering themselves. Look at Asians. They came to this country with an even bigger handicap, they almost never take advantage of Affirmative Action and yet they are over-represented in the professions and the top earning brackets. The angry white heterosexual males have the freedom to better themselves and most of the misery in their lives they can only blame on themselves.

    The proof that white males can do very well and that the “system” is not to blame is evident because there are white ethinicities that came to America over the past 50 years that have done very well for themselves, such as Ukranians, Poles and Cubans.

    Low-class white American males will blame anyone but themselves and their own proclivities for their sad predicament.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @Nick Diaz

    I stopped reading when I realized you are either innumerate, dishonest or a poor proofreader. Either way, far more than 1 in 10,000,000 Muslims in the West have murdered people for Islam. And we must note that Muslims who approve of Islamist terrorism are just as bad as the ones who commit it. And the ones who don't approve but don't do anything to help fight it are almost as bad. So now we are talking about the vast majority of Muslims.

    , @johnny memeonic
    @Nick Diaz

    http://admin.americanthinker.com/images/bucket/2015-12/195710_5_.jpg
    http://markhumphrys.com/Images/639.jpg

    Over 1 billion muslims support Sharia Law. Terrorist acts flow from Sharia law and the Islamic teachings it is based on.

    There's hardly a single good thing that could be said about Sharia, much less bringing it over to the west. If you want to turn the west into some Saudi Arabia like shithole then I suggest continuing to let Muslims invade.

    , @Jack D
    @Nick Diaz

    I think you've got a few too many 9's going there, but regardless. Let's say we were talking here about a Chinese manufacturer of say computer monitors. 99.99x% of the time, the monitors that they sell you are relatively harmless, but the remaining .001% of the time, they explode violently and wipe out an entire office or public gathering place, killing dozens. Would you accept this situation or would you demand that the importation of these monitors be halted until the problem was corrected?

    Replies: @candid_observer

    , @AnotherDad
    @Nick Diaz


    The FACT is that 99.99999% of Muslim immigrants to both Europe and America do not committ terrorist acts and kill people. This is simply incontrovertible. Therefore, trying to argue that Muslims, as an entire religious group, should be prohibited from immigrating to the U.S as a deterrant to terrorist is asinine.
     
    Nick, I was going to call out your utter innumeracy--or perhaps confusion about what "FACT" means--but i see that Andrew and Jack have beaten me to it.

    Let me throw in the larger point though: It's not just terrorism it's continual *contention*. Having a nation with a bunch of muslims in it means continual contention, continual strife. Muslims simply do not play well with others--particularly Christians and Jews but also Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, etc. etc.

    Furthermore ... i just don't want them around! My ancestors built this nation, and i simply *do not want* to deal with muslims. Don't want to see their veiled\burka'd women, hear their call to pray, observe their holidays, negotiate swimming pool hours for them, have my descendants subjected to "tolerance" propaganda about them.

    And that's enough! There is no *right* to immigrate into the United States (or anywhere else). More muslims provide absolutely no benefit to Americans--other than for muslims already here trying to get more of co-religionists in to further mess up the joint. Their presence is bad for Americans\America ... and that, and that alone is the standard for judging immigration: Does it make life *better* for Americans. Generally that answer is "no"--immigration is generally a bad thing for the people being immigrated upon. But for Muslims it is a resounding ... "no!"

    More Muslims makes life worse for Americans so they absolutely should not be allowed to come. QED.
    , @Lurker
    @Nick Diaz

    Try to imagine the scene, perhaps a backroom in a government building, in some formerly white, nominally Christian country.

    "You know, I've been thinking, what we really need round here is millions of Muslims from the 3rd world. Come on guys, who's with me?!"

    What was the problem that mass importation of Muslims was the solution to?

  179. Lot says:
    @ben tillman
    @Lot


    What does “Jews” mean here? Organized Jewish groups? No way they are the “most persistent pressure group” for immigration, that would be low wage employers and companies that sell a lot of crap to poor hispanics....
     
    "Are"? No one said anything about "are"!. It's "have been" -- since 1881.

    Back then, there weren't any "companies that [sold] a lot of crap to poor hispanics". Now, of course, we have a race to the bottom, with unscrupulous people exploiting the situation and ordinary people just trying to make ends meet, but the organized Jewish community continues its persistent pro-immigration stance, while others just play the hand they're dealt.

    Replies: @Lot

    So in a hypothetical judenfrei USA, we never had mass immigration? Really?

    Sorry bud, but white gentiles have always been happy to sell out their brothers and their grandchildren to make a quick buck with cheap non-white labor. It wasn’t the Jews who brought blacks to America, it wasn’t Jews who freed them, and it is not the Jews who own most of the Central Valley Farms and other Big Ag industries that, relative to their economic size, are the single biggest promoters of low-IQ peasant immigration to the United States.

    It was an anti-semite, Henry Ford, who was most responsible for bringing southern blacks up north in place of the German and Eastern European immigrants that traditionally worked in northern factories. Immigration from Europe, as I noted before, had reduced the non-white share of the United States from 20% in 1830 to 10% in 1930. It was, in part, anti-semites and Nordicists who shut that process down.

    Jews are far from innocent in these matters, and I will not argue against the claim that we have a disproportionate share of the responsibility for the degradation of the American stock.

    • Replies: @Perspective
    @Lot

    Agreed. Slowing the arrival of immigrants from Europe reversed the growing white proportion of the country well before the 1965 immigration act - though of course the act greatly accelerated that nascent trend. An excellent resource on early US demographics is the historical census statistics: http://mapmaker.rutgers.edu/REFERENCE/Hist_Pop_stats.pdf

    Check out California on page 163, population of Mexican origin was only 2.1 percent in 1910, by 1930, this percentage had increased to 6.8.

    , @The Undiscovered Jew
    @Lot

    Jews are far from innocent in these matters, and I will not argue against the claim that we have a disproportionate share of the responsibility for the degradation of the American stock.

    There's plenty of blame to go around and I'm not denying Jewish overrepresentation (though games are played with that count by counting partial Jews as full Jews).

    What I object is to antisemites using Jews as a way to cover up the fact of the greater importance of gentile liberals basically having the same objectives and motives.

    , @anon
    @Lot


    It wasn’t the Jews who brought blacks to America
     
    Yes it was.

    The first sugar plantations were set up on the Atlantic islands by Jews.

    The resulting genetics - mixed African and Jewish - are all over central America (and the ex-Spanish bits of USA).
  180. @Charles Erwin Wilson
    @grmbl

    Well well, aren't you the cynical bastard? Ascribing a suppressed, but vile, "light up the ovens" antisemitism to Steve on the basis that you think he really would like to embrace his inner Himmler, but does not do so for business reasons. If Steve shared his true preferences, what do you think they would be?

    Replies: @grmbl

    Read what I wrote again. For all I know, in his heart of hearts Steve is completely indifferent to Jews. With a sufficiently creative imagination, you could even posit that he is secretly philosemitic but broadcasts his style of late 19th-century antisemitism because he wants to draw susceptible people away from the more hardcore kind. Being a “cynical bastard” myself, I lean towards a more commercial explanation.

    • Replies: @anon
    @grmbl

    The msm is overflowing with Jewish pundits promoting open borders for everywhere except Israel.

    Replies: @The Undiscovered Jew

  181. @Discard
    @Flip

    The King of England, (George III) was German at the time of the American Revolution. Before his grandfather (George I),took the throne, the previous King (William of Orange) was Dutch.

    I'd say the Founders accepted a certain amount of Northern European mixing. Moslems? I doubt it.

    Replies: @Lot

    the previous King (William of Orange) was Dutch.

    Not too Dutch. His mother was the child of King Charles and his wife, whose parents in turn were the King of France and Marie de’ Medici.

  182. @Leftist conservative
    the establishment hates trump talking sense about immigration because our ponzi scheme economy is only just held together by the growth provided by immigration.

    And leading liberals (and most GOP leaders) do whatever the Establishment wants

    Replies: @Realist

    You are absolutely right. Our economy is dependent on population growth

    • Replies: @anon
    @Realist

    no it isn't - it's being destroyed by population growth

    mass immigration = down pressure on wages + upward pressure on housing costs = stagnation

    the cheap labor lobby who own the media won't admit it because they personally are still benefiting from the cheap labor

    Replies: @Realist

  183. @Nick Diaz
    The FACT is that 99.99999% of Muslim immigrants to both Europe and America do not committ terrorist acts and kill people. This is simply incontrovertible. Therefore, trying to argue that Muslims, as an entire religious group, should be prohibited from immigrating to the U.S as a deterrant to terrorist is asinine.

    And how nice of you, Sailer, to try to pass the 1924 Immigration Act as an anti-immigration bill. In reality, the primary argument for that Act was eugenicist, that southern Europeans such as Spaniards and Italians were biologically inferior to northern European stock, and that allowing large numbers of such immigrants would result in the deterioration of the genetic quality of the American people. This is a well-known historical fact. You know this very well, too. The problem is that it doesen't fit your conservative misrepresentation of history, that presents the America of old as a country where all ethnicities except for blacks held the same social status as WASPS.

    And your comment about gay interior decorators in the Trump Towers was hilarious because it shows what a blowhard you are. Yes, gay men are more feminine than heterosexual men on average. Who cares? They tend to be far superior to straight men at everything: they are overrepresentated among the greatest thinkers and artists, are more productive, there is a much higher proportion of gay men who are university-educated, working in the professions and they committ far less homicides, etc.

    It is easy to diagnose the typical Trump voter: white, male, heterosexual and without a college education. That is, the people who have been the most disenfranchised in America over the past 50 years. But it is not the "system", or "immigration" that is to blame here: no one is forcing white heterosexual males to not try to earn an education, to be indolent and to get drunk on cheap beer every day instead of bettering themselves. Look at Asians. They came to this country with an even bigger handicap, they almost never take advantage of Affirmative Action and yet they are over-represented in the professions and the top earning brackets. The angry white heterosexual males have the freedom to better themselves and most of the misery in their lives they can only blame on themselves.

    The proof that white males can do very well and that the "system" is not to blame is evident because there are white ethinicities that came to America over the past 50 years that have done very well for themselves, such as Ukranians, Poles and Cubans.

    Low-class white American males will blame anyone but themselves and their own proclivities for their sad predicament.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @johnny memeonic, @Jack D, @AnotherDad, @Lurker

    I stopped reading when I realized you are either innumerate, dishonest or a poor proofreader. Either way, far more than 1 in 10,000,000 Muslims in the West have murdered people for Islam. And we must note that Muslims who approve of Islamist terrorism are just as bad as the ones who commit it. And the ones who don’t approve but don’t do anything to help fight it are almost as bad. So now we are talking about the vast majority of Muslims.

  184. @The Undiscovered Jew
    Placing a plaque with Emma's poem on the base of the Statue of Liberty was the single greatest act of Jewish propaganda* in the history of the world.

    Jews were no more guilty of opening the borders than any other elite gentile American and polls* show a majority or plurality want less immigration.

    About half of all Hispanics are either illegal immigrants or descended from illegal immigrants (their children, amnestied, or legally sponsored by amnestied illegals). There's no way the authors of the 1965 act would have known how much illegal immigration there would be starting in the Carter administration.

    It also doesn't make any theoretical sense why 'diluting the majority' would be beneficial to Jews. Doing so creates a power vacuum where every ethnic group is fighting for power with every other group, thus making it more likely for Jewish ethnicity to be noticed.

    Immigration also afflicted urban areas where Jews congregate decades before it became noticeable in the heartland. How did turning the few remaining 'good' public schools in NYC into Asian ghettos help secular Jews?



    http://cis.org/ReligionAndImmigrationPoll

    In contrast to many religious leaders, most members think immigration is too high.

    Jews: 50 percent said it is too high; 5 percent said is too low; 22 percent just right.

    http://www.jta.org/news/article/2010/10/12/2741253/poll-jewish-support-for-obama-falling

    The survey asked its Jewish respondents: “A new law in Arizona gives police the power to ask people they’ve stopped to verify their residency status. Supporters say this will help crack down on illegal immigration. Opponents say it could violate civil rights and lead to racial profiling. On balance, do you support or oppose this law?”

    The result was a slim majority in favor of the law: 52 percent to 46 percent.

    Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome

    Trump should reallyy win big with that demographic, seeing how he is the only cantidate against mass immigration.

    • Replies: @The Undiscovered Jew
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    Trump should reallyy win big with that demographic, seeing how he is the only cantidate against mass immigration.

    Unfortunately they will vote Democrat despite immigration (not that recent Republican nominees have been acceptable on the issue), just as blacks vote Democrat despite black hostility to homosexual marriage.

  185. On June 16, 2015, Donald Trump announced his candidacy for the presidency and made immigration, illegal immigration in particular, his signature issue.

    Exactly one year later the issue of immigration looms larger in the public sphere and it is due to one person for having the courage to highlight it from day one of his candidacy.

    By the way, whatever happened to Jeb! ? Has Jeb! made any comments regarding the shooting in Orlando as he was FL’s governor not too long ago.

    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    Jeb is still waiting for Columba to tell him what to say and to translate it into English.

  186. @Nick Diaz
    The FACT is that 99.99999% of Muslim immigrants to both Europe and America do not committ terrorist acts and kill people. This is simply incontrovertible. Therefore, trying to argue that Muslims, as an entire religious group, should be prohibited from immigrating to the U.S as a deterrant to terrorist is asinine.

    And how nice of you, Sailer, to try to pass the 1924 Immigration Act as an anti-immigration bill. In reality, the primary argument for that Act was eugenicist, that southern Europeans such as Spaniards and Italians were biologically inferior to northern European stock, and that allowing large numbers of such immigrants would result in the deterioration of the genetic quality of the American people. This is a well-known historical fact. You know this very well, too. The problem is that it doesen't fit your conservative misrepresentation of history, that presents the America of old as a country where all ethnicities except for blacks held the same social status as WASPS.

    And your comment about gay interior decorators in the Trump Towers was hilarious because it shows what a blowhard you are. Yes, gay men are more feminine than heterosexual men on average. Who cares? They tend to be far superior to straight men at everything: they are overrepresentated among the greatest thinkers and artists, are more productive, there is a much higher proportion of gay men who are university-educated, working in the professions and they committ far less homicides, etc.

    It is easy to diagnose the typical Trump voter: white, male, heterosexual and without a college education. That is, the people who have been the most disenfranchised in America over the past 50 years. But it is not the "system", or "immigration" that is to blame here: no one is forcing white heterosexual males to not try to earn an education, to be indolent and to get drunk on cheap beer every day instead of bettering themselves. Look at Asians. They came to this country with an even bigger handicap, they almost never take advantage of Affirmative Action and yet they are over-represented in the professions and the top earning brackets. The angry white heterosexual males have the freedom to better themselves and most of the misery in their lives they can only blame on themselves.

    The proof that white males can do very well and that the "system" is not to blame is evident because there are white ethinicities that came to America over the past 50 years that have done very well for themselves, such as Ukranians, Poles and Cubans.

    Low-class white American males will blame anyone but themselves and their own proclivities for their sad predicament.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @johnny memeonic, @Jack D, @AnotherDad, @Lurker

    Over 1 billion muslims support Sharia Law. Terrorist acts flow from Sharia law and the Islamic teachings it is based on.

    There’s hardly a single good thing that could be said about Sharia, much less bringing it over to the west. If you want to turn the west into some Saudi Arabia like shithole then I suggest continuing to let Muslims invade.

  187. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @JohnnyWalker123
    @Dirk Dagger

    Back and to the left.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MLc0udf_74

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Dirk Dagger, @AnotherDad

    The whole “Back and to the left” argument is spurious. If you study the Zapruder frames a bit more closely you will see JFKs head push forward upon impact just as you would expect if shot from behind.

    The movie “JFK” while very entertaining is essentially a 3.5 hour continuous lie. Check out Dave Reitz’s meticulously researched site JFK-100 page at http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100menu.html
    This thoroughly debunks Oliver Stone’s (Jim Garrison’s) nonsense. If Mark Lane, Charles Weiskopf, and Garrison could not find a single shred of proof of a conspiracy with subpoena power then what chance does Joe Sixpack have? when was the last time Dems and Repubs agreed on anything yet on the Warren Commission they agreed to perpetrate the crime of the century?! The conspiracy theorists spew their bile in pursuit of the almighty dollar.

    Other sources for truth regarding the JFK assassination:
    Reclaiming History by Bugliosi
    The Garrison Case (a study in the abuse of power) by M. Brener
    False Witness by P. Lambert
    American Grotesque by J. Kirkwood

    • Agree: PV van der Byl
  188. @ben tillman
    @Jimi Shmendrix


    Fancy how you managed to peg Emma Lazarus as a “Zionist” inasmuch as she died a decade before the Zionist movement was founded.
     
    Thanks for the mendacity. Zionism has been around for centuries.

    Replies: @Jimi Shmendrix

    Don’t mention it. If the “Zionism” you refer to is the one mentioned 3 times daily as #10 of the primary 18 prayers, then yes, it’s been around for millennia. Because, after all, there’s no place like home.

    But that’s spiritual Zionism. Political Zionism is no more than 120 years old.

  189. @ben tillman
    @Brutusale


    What happened in Newport doesn’t really matter. What happened in Roger Williams’ Rhode Island, however, was being pretty much the only colony with freedom of religion. It would naturally be the landing point for a Jew.
     
    Funny, then, that so many chose to go elsewhere.

    Replies: @Brutusale

    Those Jews, they Wander.

  190. @Lot
    @ben tillman

    So in a hypothetical judenfrei USA, we never had mass immigration? Really?

    Sorry bud, but white gentiles have always been happy to sell out their brothers and their grandchildren to make a quick buck with cheap non-white labor. It wasn't the Jews who brought blacks to America, it wasn't Jews who freed them, and it is not the Jews who own most of the Central Valley Farms and other Big Ag industries that, relative to their economic size, are the single biggest promoters of low-IQ peasant immigration to the United States.

    It was an anti-semite, Henry Ford, who was most responsible for bringing southern blacks up north in place of the German and Eastern European immigrants that traditionally worked in northern factories. Immigration from Europe, as I noted before, had reduced the non-white share of the United States from 20% in 1830 to 10% in 1930. It was, in part, anti-semites and Nordicists who shut that process down.

    Jews are far from innocent in these matters, and I will not argue against the claim that we have a disproportionate share of the responsibility for the degradation of the American stock.

    Replies: @Perspective, @The Undiscovered Jew, @anon

    Agreed. Slowing the arrival of immigrants from Europe reversed the growing white proportion of the country well before the 1965 immigration act – though of course the act greatly accelerated that nascent trend. An excellent resource on early US demographics is the historical census statistics: http://mapmaker.rutgers.edu/REFERENCE/Hist_Pop_stats.pdf

    Check out California on page 163, population of Mexican origin was only 2.1 percent in 1910, by 1930, this percentage had increased to 6.8.

  191. @Nick Diaz
    The FACT is that 99.99999% of Muslim immigrants to both Europe and America do not committ terrorist acts and kill people. This is simply incontrovertible. Therefore, trying to argue that Muslims, as an entire religious group, should be prohibited from immigrating to the U.S as a deterrant to terrorist is asinine.

    And how nice of you, Sailer, to try to pass the 1924 Immigration Act as an anti-immigration bill. In reality, the primary argument for that Act was eugenicist, that southern Europeans such as Spaniards and Italians were biologically inferior to northern European stock, and that allowing large numbers of such immigrants would result in the deterioration of the genetic quality of the American people. This is a well-known historical fact. You know this very well, too. The problem is that it doesen't fit your conservative misrepresentation of history, that presents the America of old as a country where all ethnicities except for blacks held the same social status as WASPS.

    And your comment about gay interior decorators in the Trump Towers was hilarious because it shows what a blowhard you are. Yes, gay men are more feminine than heterosexual men on average. Who cares? They tend to be far superior to straight men at everything: they are overrepresentated among the greatest thinkers and artists, are more productive, there is a much higher proportion of gay men who are university-educated, working in the professions and they committ far less homicides, etc.

    It is easy to diagnose the typical Trump voter: white, male, heterosexual and without a college education. That is, the people who have been the most disenfranchised in America over the past 50 years. But it is not the "system", or "immigration" that is to blame here: no one is forcing white heterosexual males to not try to earn an education, to be indolent and to get drunk on cheap beer every day instead of bettering themselves. Look at Asians. They came to this country with an even bigger handicap, they almost never take advantage of Affirmative Action and yet they are over-represented in the professions and the top earning brackets. The angry white heterosexual males have the freedom to better themselves and most of the misery in their lives they can only blame on themselves.

    The proof that white males can do very well and that the "system" is not to blame is evident because there are white ethinicities that came to America over the past 50 years that have done very well for themselves, such as Ukranians, Poles and Cubans.

    Low-class white American males will blame anyone but themselves and their own proclivities for their sad predicament.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @johnny memeonic, @Jack D, @AnotherDad, @Lurker

    I think you’ve got a few too many 9’s going there, but regardless. Let’s say we were talking here about a Chinese manufacturer of say computer monitors. 99.99x% of the time, the monitors that they sell you are relatively harmless, but the remaining .001% of the time, they explode violently and wipe out an entire office or public gathering place, killing dozens. Would you accept this situation or would you demand that the importation of these monitors be halted until the problem was corrected?

    • Replies: @candid_observer
    @Jack D

    Your point is spot on

    Sure, the vast majority of Muslims in the US will not engage in any kind of terrorism. But, at this point, 2/3 of those killed by terrorists after 9/11 and excluding the 3,000 killed on that date are killed by Muslims. Since Muslims make up -- at least according to PEW -- only a bit more than 3,000,000 people in the US, and the US is over 300,000,000 in population, this means that Muslim terrorists kill at a rate approximately 200 times as much as the rest of the population.

    There is no better single factor for predicting whether someone is going to be a terrorist than a Muslim background. Obviously, other factors can and should be added to narrow down the truly dangerous candidates. But refusing to consider the Muslim angle undermines entirely any efforts to catch terrorists before they strike. Whatever other factors we may use to narrow down suspects just have very little power. If we use only those factors, and on the entire population instead of on Muslims, we effectively swamp our list of candidates with app. 100 times as many individuals. Given limited resources, this effectively gives up the game. It is the equivalent to just resigning ourselves to terrorism as a regular and entirely unavoidable part of our lives.

  192. Expected and on cue. Your debunkers have been debunked. Posner’s Case Closed, for example. He admitted he asked the publishers what they wanted. LHO did it all by his lonesome. Lone Dead Nuts tell no tales. Stone was truthful. Had no reason not to be unlike the “debunkers.”. They can’t stop the research only suppress it. C.J. Jackson of Life who made sure he got the Zapruder film was one of the first.
    Serious books: JFK and the Unspeakable. Even mainstream historians could not but praise it. Crossfire by Jim Marrs, a young Dallas reporter in 1963. Best research on the planet. YouTube interview with Fletcher Prouty …you will never look at government as beneficent ..but what convinced yours truly are the facts that were deliberately ignored by the even when acknowledged as legit. The man is not for telling the truth. It is for supporting the agenda of those who own it. These perpetrators of the Lies that are bleedin’ obvious must be carving a special tier for their ilk along the inner side of Dante’s Inferno.

  193. @JohnnyWalker123
    @Dirk Dagger

    Back and to the left.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MLc0udf_74

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Dirk Dagger, @AnotherDad

    Stone? Ha. Feynman.

  194. @Jack D
    @Nick Diaz

    I think you've got a few too many 9's going there, but regardless. Let's say we were talking here about a Chinese manufacturer of say computer monitors. 99.99x% of the time, the monitors that they sell you are relatively harmless, but the remaining .001% of the time, they explode violently and wipe out an entire office or public gathering place, killing dozens. Would you accept this situation or would you demand that the importation of these monitors be halted until the problem was corrected?

    Replies: @candid_observer

    Your point is spot on

    Sure, the vast majority of Muslims in the US will not engage in any kind of terrorism. But, at this point, 2/3 of those killed by terrorists after 9/11 and excluding the 3,000 killed on that date are killed by Muslims. Since Muslims make up — at least according to PEW — only a bit more than 3,000,000 people in the US, and the US is over 300,000,000 in population, this means that Muslim terrorists kill at a rate approximately 200 times as much as the rest of the population.

    There is no better single factor for predicting whether someone is going to be a terrorist than a Muslim background. Obviously, other factors can and should be added to narrow down the truly dangerous candidates. But refusing to consider the Muslim angle undermines entirely any efforts to catch terrorists before they strike. Whatever other factors we may use to narrow down suspects just have very little power. If we use only those factors, and on the entire population instead of on Muslims, we effectively swamp our list of candidates with app. 100 times as many individuals. Given limited resources, this effectively gives up the game. It is the equivalent to just resigning ourselves to terrorism as a regular and entirely unavoidable part of our lives.

  195. @Lot
    The 1920's immigration policy was a bad idea in retrospect. Absent its passage, probably another 300,000 or so Jews would have come from eastern europe in the 20's and 30's and perhaps another million in the 1940's. Of that ~1.6 million, probably 1 million were killed in the Holocaust.

    WWII would have also been at least a little less vicious if some of Europe's excess young people had come to the USA. And we would have defeated Nazi Germany sooner if we had greater manpower and Germany had fewer human resources to exploit for its defense.

    Replies: @Hare Krishna, @anon

    Not only would no 1924 Immigration Act mean America could have taken advantage of all that European talent, but it would have meant a much whiter America. Every city in America would be majority white today with the possible exception of DC. Neighborhoods like Steve’s family’s home turf of Austin in Chicago would still be safe places. America would have much lower crime, and much less gun violence. It would have also meant less nonwhite immigration nowadays.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @Hare Krishna


    Not only would no 1924 Immigration Act mean America could have taken advantage of all that European talent, but it would have meant a much whiter America. Every city in America would be majority white today with the possible exception of DC. Neighborhoods like Steve’s family’s home turf of Austin in Chicago would still be safe places. America would have much lower crime, and much less gun violence. It would have also meant less nonwhite immigration nowadays.
     
    Jeez, more in-numerate nonsense.

    One thing i enjoy about going to iSteve is not just Steve but most of the commenters are at least marginally numerate and logically minded and while we disagree about the sociology of this or that group or this or that policy, generally the discussion is orders of magnitude more rational than the innumerate nonsense that emanates from these Ivy League BAs who control the national conversation.

    Your innumeracy:
    The US of 1960 was about 90% white and 10% black. Indians, Asians, Hispanics were essentially noise--1%.

    To move that say 5 points to 95% black--without just conducting a black genocide--requires ... *doubling* the white population of the United States.

    This is very well understood by anyone who is "numerate". It's very very hard to move up the percentage of something that is already at a high percentage. Doubling the percentage of something with a small percentage is relatively easy--and scales directly. For instance if you have 3% of widget market, doubling your sales gets you--assuming others remain the same--roughly 6% of the market. Doubling your sales when you have 90% does not get you to 180%, it gets you to about 95%. And it is *wildly* harder to do.

    Even without the 1924 Immigration Control Act, we would not have gotten a lot of immigration in the 1930s because our Great Depression was about the worst. (And if we didn't have immigration control before we'd certainly have gotten it then.) There was actually net emmigration from the US during some of the early years of the Depression. (We didn't even fill the quotas.) Perhaps in the immediate post-war we'd have taken in more people from Europe--there were hundreds of thousands. At the very max open immigration during this period and you'd be talking about maybe 10 million people and some like number of descendants. This would alter the white percentage by at most maybe 5 points. Barely on the cusp of noticeable. Essentially no affect on what you'd perceive about demography from driving around your neighborhoods or cities. Utterly swamped by the magnitude of post-1964 demographic change we've seen.

    The reasons for the falling white percentage of the population are
    -- relatively higher black fertility; due in part from welfare; which has declined to replacement post 90s
    -- lower, sub-replacement, white fertility, due to all the cultural and economic changes (especially feminism and female careerism)
    -- and--far and away the biggie--massive non-white post 1964 immigration

    If you want to live in a white society--and i do--then you need to tackle those causes. Most of all *stop immigration*. Then ideally get some black nationalism, Hispanic nationalism, white nationalism going and find a way to separate.

    Ultimately, you're going to have to recover white "mojo"--have whites *care* about preserving their race and culture.

    Replies: @Hare Krishna, @Perspective

    , @Jack D
    @Hare Krishna

    Y'all are wasting your breath. For this crowd, it was all worth it if it kept one more Joo out of America. They're not founding stock, you see.

  196. @JohnnyWalker123
    @Dirk Dagger

    Back and to the left.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MLc0udf_74

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Dirk Dagger, @AnotherDad

    Back and to the left.

    Sheer stupidity and sheer dishonesty.

    The physics of Kennedy’s body jerking around, given it’s contact–back, butt, feet–with a car that is in turn rolling down the highway is complicated.

    But his brain spilling out of his head in front of his ears–which is stone cold obvious from even these Hollyweird edited film clips–is not. This shot came from behind Kennedy. It absolutely positively did not come from the “grassy knoll”.

    It was entirely *possible* for say the anti-Castro Cubans–feeling betrayed at the Bay of Pigs–or for the hothead Castro–mad at the Bay of Pigs and assassination attempts–or for the mob–worried about Robert Kennedy’s investigation– to have wanted Kennedy dead. But there’s no evidence that any of them are *actually* behind his assassination.

    I had to listen to all this crap from my Irish-Catholic father growing up–every one of those conspiracy books read and regurgitated. But there’s simply nothing to any of it. No evidence. Nothing contradicting the commie loony loser Oswald–with the Marine marksmanship badge–doing his thing and getting lucky. The evidence that the national security establishment had some sort of problem with the “pay any price, bear any burden” cold warrior Kennedy is also non-existent.

    Also ridiculous is all the utopian fawning that in losing Kennedy we somehow lost some golden age he would have led us into. Maybe–maybe–he done something different in Vietnam and the 60s would have been less contentious? Who knows? Maybe he’d have actually done *less* utopian Great Society crap than Johnson and we’d have been better off? Again who knows? Most of the destabilizing 60s was just baked into the cake–civil rights (and black dysfunction), the Jewish ascendancy (and anti-traditional propaganda), birth control pills, prosperity and spoiled boomer children. A true republic does not need any *particular* leader and does not swoon over one. In a republic it’s the mass of responsible men taking care of their families that fundamentally chart the course and that course doesn’t jump wildly around because of an assassins’ bullet. Of course now ruled by a hostile anti-national elite, an imperial judiciary, anti-white minorities, silly feminine nonsense … there is precious little “republic” left.

  197. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    On June 16, 2015, Donald Trump announced his candidacy for the presidency and made immigration, illegal immigration in particular, his signature issue.

    Exactly one year later the issue of immigration looms larger in the public sphere and it is due to one person for having the courage to highlight it from day one of his candidacy.

    By the way, whatever happened to Jeb! ? Has Jeb! made any comments regarding the shooting in Orlando as he was FL's governor not too long ago.

    Replies: @Diversity Heretic

    Jeb is still waiting for Columba to tell him what to say and to translate it into English.

  198. @Jack D
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Emma Lazarus's ancestors arrived in the US before the American Revolution, probably before yours did.

    Replies: @AlphaSupremo, @SPMoore8, @Dirk Dagger, @iSteveFan, @woodNfish, @tbraton, @Yo Trump, @Chris Mallory, @Buzz Mohawk, @AnotherDad

    Emma Lazarus’s ancestors arrived in the US before the American Revolution, probably before yours did.

    Which pretty much makes the point i’ve argued with you before:

    Having a separate tribal group in one’s nation–particularly a successful one–is a bad idea.

    Here Lazarus’s family had been in America for 100+ years, and yet her keen interest was her co-tribals in Russia, rather than what is good for her nominally “fellow” Americans.

    Now in fairness, Lazarus could not know what a disaster these eastern Jews would ultimately be for America, with their success coupled with contempt for American gentiles, radical politics, anti-Christianity, anti-traditionalism, anti-republicanism, anti-nationalism. But the point isn’t just the outcome we see before us as we grasp at last straws like Trump. It’s that her innate tendency was to succor her tribe not her fellow citizens.

    Of course, this is entirely human. Which is why letting foreign, and especially endogamous, tribes in your nation is a *bad idea*.

  199. @Discard
    @t

    I don't mourn them either. This public "grief" is just political theater.

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    I don’t mourn them either. This public “grief” is just political theater.

    Me neither.

    My natural reaction toward gays is sort of eeeww. I have i think–who knows other minds?–normal standard issue “homo-aversion”. I find it disgusting, utterly lacking the beauty and deep drama of biologically correct coupling. But my attitude toward gays was always–hey great, go do your gay thing … over there.

    But in the last 20 or so gays have insisted–with Hollyweird obliging\promoting–of sticking their dysfunction in everyone else’s face. And then in the last ten in positively browbeating people–mostly Christians–for simply declining to want to participate in cheering their gayness. A direct assault on basic freedom of association. (BTW, not writing that down explicitly is the big failure of the founding father’s. Little could they imagine what sort of police state nonsense was in store.) In other words, gays have become not just crude, but rude, bossy and totalitarian. Screw ’em.

  200. Stephen Hunter’s The Third Bullet is an entertaining alternative history of the JFK shooting: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13547517-the-third-bullet

  201. @Nick Diaz
    The FACT is that 99.99999% of Muslim immigrants to both Europe and America do not committ terrorist acts and kill people. This is simply incontrovertible. Therefore, trying to argue that Muslims, as an entire religious group, should be prohibited from immigrating to the U.S as a deterrant to terrorist is asinine.

    And how nice of you, Sailer, to try to pass the 1924 Immigration Act as an anti-immigration bill. In reality, the primary argument for that Act was eugenicist, that southern Europeans such as Spaniards and Italians were biologically inferior to northern European stock, and that allowing large numbers of such immigrants would result in the deterioration of the genetic quality of the American people. This is a well-known historical fact. You know this very well, too. The problem is that it doesen't fit your conservative misrepresentation of history, that presents the America of old as a country where all ethnicities except for blacks held the same social status as WASPS.

    And your comment about gay interior decorators in the Trump Towers was hilarious because it shows what a blowhard you are. Yes, gay men are more feminine than heterosexual men on average. Who cares? They tend to be far superior to straight men at everything: they are overrepresentated among the greatest thinkers and artists, are more productive, there is a much higher proportion of gay men who are university-educated, working in the professions and they committ far less homicides, etc.

    It is easy to diagnose the typical Trump voter: white, male, heterosexual and without a college education. That is, the people who have been the most disenfranchised in America over the past 50 years. But it is not the "system", or "immigration" that is to blame here: no one is forcing white heterosexual males to not try to earn an education, to be indolent and to get drunk on cheap beer every day instead of bettering themselves. Look at Asians. They came to this country with an even bigger handicap, they almost never take advantage of Affirmative Action and yet they are over-represented in the professions and the top earning brackets. The angry white heterosexual males have the freedom to better themselves and most of the misery in their lives they can only blame on themselves.

    The proof that white males can do very well and that the "system" is not to blame is evident because there are white ethinicities that came to America over the past 50 years that have done very well for themselves, such as Ukranians, Poles and Cubans.

    Low-class white American males will blame anyone but themselves and their own proclivities for their sad predicament.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @johnny memeonic, @Jack D, @AnotherDad, @Lurker

    The FACT is that 99.99999% of Muslim immigrants to both Europe and America do not committ terrorist acts and kill people. This is simply incontrovertible. Therefore, trying to argue that Muslims, as an entire religious group, should be prohibited from immigrating to the U.S as a deterrant to terrorist is asinine.

    Nick, I was going to call out your utter innumeracy–or perhaps confusion about what “FACT” means–but i see that Andrew and Jack have beaten me to it.

    Let me throw in the larger point though: It’s not just terrorism it’s continual *contention*. Having a nation with a bunch of muslims in it means continual contention, continual strife. Muslims simply do not play well with others–particularly Christians and Jews but also Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, etc. etc.

    Furthermore … i just don’t want them around! My ancestors built this nation, and i simply *do not want* to deal with muslims. Don’t want to see their veiled\burka’d women, hear their call to pray, observe their holidays, negotiate swimming pool hours for them, have my descendants subjected to “tolerance” propaganda about them.

    And that’s enough! There is no *right* to immigrate into the United States (or anywhere else). More muslims provide absolutely no benefit to Americans–other than for muslims already here trying to get more of co-religionists in to further mess up the joint. Their presence is bad for Americans\America … and that, and that alone is the standard for judging immigration: Does it make life *better* for Americans. Generally that answer is “no”–immigration is generally a bad thing for the people being immigrated upon. But for Muslims it is a resounding … “no!”

    More Muslims makes life worse for Americans so they absolutely should not be allowed to come. QED.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob, BB753
  202. IBC says:
    @Jack D
    @Je Suis Omar Mateen

    Yes, last night 11 out of 10 late night talk show hosts all denounced guns and those dirty NRA no-goodniks who allow us to own guns. Is there like a jornolist II that sends out talking points from the Hillary campaign?

    I get the feeling though that this is starting not to work. Hillary said in 2008 that she had not shattered the (imaginary) glass ceiling but that there were now lots of cracks in it. I get the feeling that there are beginning to be cracks in the Democrat coalition.

    You have to be pretty desperate to try to connect Omar Mateen to the white frat boy "rapist" from Stanford as if nobody is going to notice that there is a little something different about Omar. And while there are lots of low information voters, most people, no matter how stupid, realize on some level that guns do not walk into nightclubs and go on rampages by themselves. And there is the little detail that Omar was a professional security guard and even in most countries where they don't allow ordinary people to have guns, security guards have access to them.

    Besides being an obvious red herring, the anti-gun crowd has to explain how, if we are not going to build a fence (and god forbid we should do such a thing), it is possible to smuggle across 11 million human beings and mucho tons of drugs every year, but there's no way that guns will come across the border once we make them illegal here.

    You can TRY to change the subject but now you have the candidate of one of the two major parties loudly NOTICING and saying the I-word and it's going to be hard to memory hole Omar's pledge of allegiance to the Islamic State and retcon him into a hateful white man like George Zimmerman. Maybe if he had changed his name to Omar Zimmerman?

    You can denounce Trump as a badthinking racis' and try talking about guns instead but he is going to be on the teevee every day at least from now until November so it's not going to be that easy to shut him up like some poor schmuck whom you can force out of his job for having said a bad word. Even Hillary had to (reluctantly) say the I-word in order to avoid being outflanked by Trump or looking like a total fool.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @IBC, @Heretic

    Some good points, but you have to admit that American gun “culture” is part of the problem. For example, preliminary reports are indicating that the Orlando shooter may have first been “radicalized” at a 4H shooting sports event in Idaho, which also happened to coincide with a seminar on goat “husbandry” given by a 13 year old boy, who was especially known to some on social media, for his golden curls and lithesome form… Now, I read somewhere else (Slate? Rolling Stone?) that Haven Monahan has a younger redneck cousin –so that story does seem plausible.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @IBC

    Hmm, I can see how this might be an uphill struggle.....

  203. @Lot
    I followed your link in the article to The New Colossus, and was reminded that it is a remarkably beautiful poem. Circa 1883, when it was written, its sentiments were quite correct.

    Nobody writes this well anymore:

    Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
    With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
    Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
    A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
    Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
    Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
    The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

    "Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
    With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
     

    Replies: @vinteuil, @Anonymous, @Big Bill, @SPMoore8, @PiltdownMan, @boogerbently, @Hippopotamusdrome, @Kylie, @Njguy73, @SFG, @Olorin

    Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
    With conquering limbs astride from land to land;

    Actually the Colossus of Rhodes stood on a marble pedestal and was toppled in an earthquake after about 70 years of giving thanks to Helias for helping Rhodes stave off invasion. IOW, it was erected as a testimony to controlled borders.

    Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand

    Last I checked, the sun rose over NY Harbor. But I guess she was talking about the view from the Lower East Side. Which always had as peculiar a view of The West as did Chelsea.

    A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning,

    Let’s just pass over the 19th-century-pop-tech-culture in this one, and remember instead Mark Twain and Tesla.

    and her name
    Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
    Glows world-wide welcome;

    This is where the Crazy Cat Lady stuff starts.

    “Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
    With silent lips.

    Crying with silent lips–I wouldn’t let that pass in a HS poetry-writing class.

    The next lines are the heavy duty Crazy Cat Lady ones.

    Sorry, Lot, but it’s crap. Like most of 20th century NY pop culture.

    Interesting note: as one of (((Jozsef Pulitzer’s))) key figures behind putting (((her and others’))) money behind installing that atrocity in NY Harbor, Lazarus submitted her own doggerel verse, written in 1883, to be carved into the base in 1903.

    The atrocity itself was originally intended to embody French sculptors’ centennial commemoration of American Independence. It was turned into a symbol of American invasion.

    My favorite part of any megadoom movie set in NYC is when the thing comes down. Wish the Sept. 11 terrorists had felt the same way…which would also have given “Emily “I Am The Twin Towers’ Doe” a much better metaphor for her 12,000-word confabulation regarding her drunken slutty outing.

    House Members Unite to Read Stanford Rape Victim’s Letter
    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/us/politics/congress-stanford-letter.html?_r=0

    Your tax dollars at work. $85 an hour times 435 = about $37K

  204. OT, sort of, but now Trump is proposing that guns not be sold to those on various terrorist watchlists:

    It’s a bad idea because depriving citizens of their Constitutional rights without due process is an inherently bad idea, as well as un-American, but it’s the kind of centrist tyranny that Trump is vulnerable to absorbing.

    But it could be good politics, because it’s not going to make it to law, and it might attract tyrannical liberal voters.

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    @Svigor

    Dems want to ban guns.

    Trump wants to ban Muslims.

    What if Trump proposed as a compromise banning Muslims from buying guns?

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

  205. The FACT is that 99.99999% of Muslim immigrants to both Europe and America do not committ terrorist acts and kill people. This is simply incontrovertible. Therefore, trying to argue that Muslims, as an entire religious group, should be prohibited from immigrating to the U.S as a deterrant to terrorist is asinine.

    But it’s not asinine it’s 100% effective. And it isn’t a deterrent. It’s a preventative. No Muslims, no Muslim crime, and none of the rest of the annoying presence of Muslims, which others have detailed.

    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    @Svigor

    Japan has virtually no Muslims (I think 40,000 in a nation of over 100 million) and no Muslim terrorism. I think the two factors are related.

  206. So in a hypothetical judenfrei USA, we never had mass immigration? Really?

    Sorry bud, but white gentiles have always been happy to sell out their brothers and their grandchildren to make a quick buck with cheap non-white labor.

    Here’s a snapshot of how that plays out:

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

    TL;DR version: Jewish legislators (overrepresented, given their population size) were 100% in lockstep in favor of open borders, and were a necessary condition of open-borders legislation; without them, open-borders goes from majority to minority.

  207. @IBC
    @Jack D

    Some good points, but you have to admit that American gun "culture" is part of the problem. For example, preliminary reports are indicating that the Orlando shooter may have first been "radicalized" at a 4H shooting sports event in Idaho, which also happened to coincide with a seminar on goat "husbandry" given by a 13 year old boy, who was especially known to some on social media, for his golden curls and lithesome form... Now, I read somewhere else (Slate? Rolling Stone?) that Haven Monahan has a younger redneck cousin --so that story does seem plausible.

    Replies: @Jack D

    Hmm, I can see how this might be an uphill struggle…..

  208. @Dave Pinsen
    @The Undiscovered Jew


    But there’s little tipjar money to be raised from pointing that out, right Steveo?
     
    It sounds like you're suggesting that Jews don't tip.

    Replies: @Lot, @The Undiscovered Jew

    Why should tip Sailer if he insists on blaming us for something we aren’t responsible for?

    Would you tip me if I changed your credit reports to suggest you’ve filed for bankruptcy ten times and served time in prison for multiple felonies?

    It’s a shame for him that he doesn’t want our help since he could raise much more money than whatever he’s getting from his current donors.

  209. @Hare Krishna
    @Lot

    Not only would no 1924 Immigration Act mean America could have taken advantage of all that European talent, but it would have meant a much whiter America. Every city in America would be majority white today with the possible exception of DC. Neighborhoods like Steve's family's home turf of Austin in Chicago would still be safe places. America would have much lower crime, and much less gun violence. It would have also meant less nonwhite immigration nowadays.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @Jack D

    Not only would no 1924 Immigration Act mean America could have taken advantage of all that European talent, but it would have meant a much whiter America. Every city in America would be majority white today with the possible exception of DC. Neighborhoods like Steve’s family’s home turf of Austin in Chicago would still be safe places. America would have much lower crime, and much less gun violence. It would have also meant less nonwhite immigration nowadays.

    Jeez, more in-numerate nonsense.

    One thing i enjoy about going to iSteve is not just Steve but most of the commenters are at least marginally numerate and logically minded and while we disagree about the sociology of this or that group or this or that policy, generally the discussion is orders of magnitude more rational than the innumerate nonsense that emanates from these Ivy League BAs who control the national conversation.

    Your innumeracy:
    The US of 1960 was about 90% white and 10% black. Indians, Asians, Hispanics were essentially noise–1%.

    To move that say 5 points to 95% black–without just conducting a black genocide–requires … *doubling* the white population of the United States.

    This is very well understood by anyone who is “numerate”. It’s very very hard to move up the percentage of something that is already at a high percentage. Doubling the percentage of something with a small percentage is relatively easy–and scales directly. For instance if you have 3% of widget market, doubling your sales gets you–assuming others remain the same–roughly 6% of the market. Doubling your sales when you have 90% does not get you to 180%, it gets you to about 95%. And it is *wildly* harder to do.

    Even without the 1924 Immigration Control Act, we would not have gotten a lot of immigration in the 1930s because our Great Depression was about the worst. (And if we didn’t have immigration control before we’d certainly have gotten it then.) There was actually net emmigration from the US during some of the early years of the Depression. (We didn’t even fill the quotas.) Perhaps in the immediate post-war we’d have taken in more people from Europe–there were hundreds of thousands. At the very max open immigration during this period and you’d be talking about maybe 10 million people and some like number of descendants. This would alter the white percentage by at most maybe 5 points. Barely on the cusp of noticeable. Essentially no affect on what you’d perceive about demography from driving around your neighborhoods or cities. Utterly swamped by the magnitude of post-1964 demographic change we’ve seen.

    The reasons for the falling white percentage of the population are
    — relatively higher black fertility; due in part from welfare; which has declined to replacement post 90s
    — lower, sub-replacement, white fertility, due to all the cultural and economic changes (especially feminism and female careerism)
    — and–far and away the biggie–massive non-white post 1964 immigration

    If you want to live in a white society–and i do–then you need to tackle those causes. Most of all *stop immigration*. Then ideally get some black nationalism, Hispanic nationalism, white nationalism going and find a way to separate.

    Ultimately, you’re going to have to recover white “mojo”–have whites *care* about preserving their race and culture.

    • Replies: @Hare Krishna
    @AnotherDad

    With more immigrants coming in from Europe there would be no need to import labor from the Southern US. Thus no great migration. And no white flight.

    , @Perspective
    @AnotherDad

    While moderate to high levels of European immigration post 1924 wouldn't have made the US as a whole much whiter (probably keep the percentage of blacks at around 10 percent), there would certainly be an impact at the local level. This would be especially true in metro areas in the mid west and north east with higher levels of immigration. I think the great migration from the south would still happen, but its demographic affect would be somewhat blunted.

  210. @grmbl
    @The Undiscovered Jew

    What do you want from Steve? Should he apologize? Should he admit that he knew all along that MacDonald is a fraud?

    He can't and won't do that. A big part of iSteve ideology is the idea that Jews have supplanted WASPs as the ruling caste of America, that they are Israel-firsters, that they harm the American people by pushing for more third-world immigration, that they demoralize and depress gentiles for competitive advantage by means of memorializing the Holocaust, and so on and so forth. The Jew as parasite sucking the lifeblood out of the host nation. This draws much of his readership (although he deletes many of their most hateful comments every day.)

    Because Steve's brand of antisemitism is not the torches-and-pitchfork kind, not genocidal, he claims that he is not an antisemite. Ultimately no one can know what he really believes. Maybe it's never been more than a coldly calculated cynical ploy to cultivate some of the fertile ground left untilled by Stormfront.

    Replies: @anon, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @The Undiscovered Jew, @anon

    What do you want from Steve? Should he apologize? Should he admit that he knew all along that MacDonald is a fraud?

    He can’t and won’t do that.

    He doesn’t have to.

    But if he and others are going to base 90% of their arguments on the word of this fool, MacDonald, and if MacDonald can be refuted simply by pointing out he played games with his own evidence, then they should expect to be countered when they make these allegations.

    The smart thing would be to stop driving the issue, but if they insist on playing a losing hand…

    • Replies: @grmbl
    @The Undiscovered Jew

    The puzzling thing to me is, why the eagerness to follow a self-evident fraud like MacDonald ... when there are plenty of things that are uniquely annoying in Jews and undisputably true?

    Look at #168 by Chrisnonymous above. Harsh words about Lazarus, and by extension, Jews like her. But C...nonymous backs up his argument at every step with evidence. In this case, a close reading of the poem; another time, he might talk about how Jews like to drive everyone else up the wall by being needlessly argumentative all the time. Plenty of evidence for that assertion, too.

    But no, always the same old conspiracy theories get trotted out. The drive for world domination by a ruthless cabal. A clannish group of master schemers as the tail wagging a 100x bigger dog. Wizards of deception and manipulation. Protocols of the Elders of Zion, updated and modified with a "group-evolutionary" veneer but essentially unchanged.

    Replies: @The Undiscovered Jew

  211. Errata:

    To move that say 5 points to 95% black–without just conducting a black genocide–requires … *doubling* the white population of the United States.

    Should read: “To move that say 5 points to 95% white …”

  212. @Lot
    @ben tillman

    So in a hypothetical judenfrei USA, we never had mass immigration? Really?

    Sorry bud, but white gentiles have always been happy to sell out their brothers and their grandchildren to make a quick buck with cheap non-white labor. It wasn't the Jews who brought blacks to America, it wasn't Jews who freed them, and it is not the Jews who own most of the Central Valley Farms and other Big Ag industries that, relative to their economic size, are the single biggest promoters of low-IQ peasant immigration to the United States.

    It was an anti-semite, Henry Ford, who was most responsible for bringing southern blacks up north in place of the German and Eastern European immigrants that traditionally worked in northern factories. Immigration from Europe, as I noted before, had reduced the non-white share of the United States from 20% in 1830 to 10% in 1930. It was, in part, anti-semites and Nordicists who shut that process down.

    Jews are far from innocent in these matters, and I will not argue against the claim that we have a disproportionate share of the responsibility for the degradation of the American stock.

    Replies: @Perspective, @The Undiscovered Jew, @anon

    Jews are far from innocent in these matters, and I will not argue against the claim that we have a disproportionate share of the responsibility for the degradation of the American stock.

    There’s plenty of blame to go around and I’m not denying Jewish overrepresentation (though games are played with that count by counting partial Jews as full Jews).

    What I object is to antisemites using Jews as a way to cover up the fact of the greater importance of gentile liberals basically having the same objectives and motives.

  213. @Hippopotamusdrome
    @The Undiscovered Jew

    Trump should reallyy win big with that demographic, seeing how he is the only cantidate against mass immigration.

    Replies: @The Undiscovered Jew

    Trump should reallyy win big with that demographic, seeing how he is the only cantidate against mass immigration.

    Unfortunately they will vote Democrat despite immigration (not that recent Republican nominees have been acceptable on the issue), just as blacks vote Democrat despite black hostility to homosexual marriage.

  214. @Ben Tillman

    Mehler only refers to one citation of Neuringer’s work in a blog comment. Mehler doesn’t provide a comprehensive review of the whole work and whether there are other mismatches between Neuringer and how they’re portrayed in CofC:

    http://h-net.msu.edu/cgi-bin/logbrowse.pl?trx=vx&list=h-ethnic&month=9807&week=e&msg=Op7hEjLz4P7WVImwLsBcYg

    Mehler questions MacDonald’s use of sources.

    My concern, at present, with Mr. MacDonald’s work, is with his use of
    sources. For example, in MacDonald, K. B. (1998). Jewish involvement
    in
    influencing United States immigration policy, 1881-1965: A historical
    review. Population and Environment, 19, 295-355. Mr. MacDonald uses
    Neuringer, S. M. (1969). American Jewry and United States immigration
    policy, 1881-1953 Ph. D. Dissertation, University of
    Wisconsin-Madison. Ann
    Arbor, MI: University Microfilms, Inc., 1971; reprinted by Arno Press
    (New
    York), 1980. He cites Neuringer extensively throughout the article.
    Here
    is an example of how MacDonald uses this source.

    On page sixteen MacDonald writes:
    Neuringer (1971, p. 164) notes that Jewish opposition to the 1921 and
    1924
    legislation was motivated less by a desire for higher levels of Jewish
    immigration than by opposition to the implicit theory that America
    should
    be dominated by individuals with northern and western European
    ancestry.
    The Jewish interest was thus to oppose the ethnic interests of the
    peoples
    of northwestern Europe in maintaining an ethnic status quo or
    increasing
    their percentage of the population. …

    Here is the relevant passage from Neuringer:

    Neuringer (1971, p. 164): “What is of at least equal significance is
    that
    the members of this group opposed these laws more because they
    possessed
    the taint of discrimination and anti-Semitism than because they would
    drastically limit Jewish immigration.”

    It seems to me, Mr. MacDonald is misrepresenting Mr. Neuringer in this
    case
    and I posted my query hoping that a historian familiar with the
    literature
    might have a judgement on MacDonald’s use of the historical data.

    Barry Mehler

  215. And I notice no one has even tried to exonerate MacDonald for that survey about supposed Jewish authoritarian tendencies.

    Anyone? Bueller?

  216. @Hare Krishna
    @Lot

    Not only would no 1924 Immigration Act mean America could have taken advantage of all that European talent, but it would have meant a much whiter America. Every city in America would be majority white today with the possible exception of DC. Neighborhoods like Steve's family's home turf of Austin in Chicago would still be safe places. America would have much lower crime, and much less gun violence. It would have also meant less nonwhite immigration nowadays.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @Jack D

    Y’all are wasting your breath. For this crowd, it was all worth it if it kept one more Joo out of America. They’re not founding stock, you see.

  217. @AnotherDad
    @Hare Krishna


    Not only would no 1924 Immigration Act mean America could have taken advantage of all that European talent, but it would have meant a much whiter America. Every city in America would be majority white today with the possible exception of DC. Neighborhoods like Steve’s family’s home turf of Austin in Chicago would still be safe places. America would have much lower crime, and much less gun violence. It would have also meant less nonwhite immigration nowadays.
     
    Jeez, more in-numerate nonsense.

    One thing i enjoy about going to iSteve is not just Steve but most of the commenters are at least marginally numerate and logically minded and while we disagree about the sociology of this or that group or this or that policy, generally the discussion is orders of magnitude more rational than the innumerate nonsense that emanates from these Ivy League BAs who control the national conversation.

    Your innumeracy:
    The US of 1960 was about 90% white and 10% black. Indians, Asians, Hispanics were essentially noise--1%.

    To move that say 5 points to 95% black--without just conducting a black genocide--requires ... *doubling* the white population of the United States.

    This is very well understood by anyone who is "numerate". It's very very hard to move up the percentage of something that is already at a high percentage. Doubling the percentage of something with a small percentage is relatively easy--and scales directly. For instance if you have 3% of widget market, doubling your sales gets you--assuming others remain the same--roughly 6% of the market. Doubling your sales when you have 90% does not get you to 180%, it gets you to about 95%. And it is *wildly* harder to do.

    Even without the 1924 Immigration Control Act, we would not have gotten a lot of immigration in the 1930s because our Great Depression was about the worst. (And if we didn't have immigration control before we'd certainly have gotten it then.) There was actually net emmigration from the US during some of the early years of the Depression. (We didn't even fill the quotas.) Perhaps in the immediate post-war we'd have taken in more people from Europe--there were hundreds of thousands. At the very max open immigration during this period and you'd be talking about maybe 10 million people and some like number of descendants. This would alter the white percentage by at most maybe 5 points. Barely on the cusp of noticeable. Essentially no affect on what you'd perceive about demography from driving around your neighborhoods or cities. Utterly swamped by the magnitude of post-1964 demographic change we've seen.

    The reasons for the falling white percentage of the population are
    -- relatively higher black fertility; due in part from welfare; which has declined to replacement post 90s
    -- lower, sub-replacement, white fertility, due to all the cultural and economic changes (especially feminism and female careerism)
    -- and--far and away the biggie--massive non-white post 1964 immigration

    If you want to live in a white society--and i do--then you need to tackle those causes. Most of all *stop immigration*. Then ideally get some black nationalism, Hispanic nationalism, white nationalism going and find a way to separate.

    Ultimately, you're going to have to recover white "mojo"--have whites *care* about preserving their race and culture.

    Replies: @Hare Krishna, @Perspective

    With more immigrants coming in from Europe there would be no need to import labor from the Southern US. Thus no great migration. And no white flight.

  218. @The Undiscovered Jew
    @grmbl

    What do you want from Steve? Should he apologize? Should he admit that he knew all along that MacDonald is a fraud?

    He can’t and won’t do that.


    He doesn't have to.

    But if he and others are going to base 90% of their arguments on the word of this fool, MacDonald, and if MacDonald can be refuted simply by pointing out he played games with his own evidence, then they should expect to be countered when they make these allegations.

    The smart thing would be to stop driving the issue, but if they insist on playing a losing hand...

    Replies: @grmbl

    The puzzling thing to me is, why the eagerness to follow a self-evident fraud like MacDonald … when there are plenty of things that are uniquely annoying in Jews and undisputably true?

    Look at #168 by Chrisnonymous above. Harsh words about Lazarus, and by extension, Jews like her. But C…nonymous backs up his argument at every step with evidence. In this case, a close reading of the poem; another time, he might talk about how Jews like to drive everyone else up the wall by being needlessly argumentative all the time. Plenty of evidence for that assertion, too.

    But no, always the same old conspiracy theories get trotted out. The drive for world domination by a ruthless cabal. A clannish group of master schemers as the tail wagging a 100x bigger dog. Wizards of deception and manipulation. Protocols of the Elders of Zion, updated and modified with a “group-evolutionary” veneer but essentially unchanged.

    • Replies: @The Undiscovered Jew
    @grmbl

    Chrisnonymous

    I agree with everything you wrote except that analysis of the poem. Chrisnonymous makes a nice demonstration that the problem with antisemitism is overanalysis of Jewish actions to find hostile intentions. In his case he reads deep, cryptic meaning that doesn't exist into a straight forward poem about Jewish immigrants.

    Replies: @grmbl

  219. @Jack D
    @Je Suis Omar Mateen

    Yes, last night 11 out of 10 late night talk show hosts all denounced guns and those dirty NRA no-goodniks who allow us to own guns. Is there like a jornolist II that sends out talking points from the Hillary campaign?

    I get the feeling though that this is starting not to work. Hillary said in 2008 that she had not shattered the (imaginary) glass ceiling but that there were now lots of cracks in it. I get the feeling that there are beginning to be cracks in the Democrat coalition.

    You have to be pretty desperate to try to connect Omar Mateen to the white frat boy "rapist" from Stanford as if nobody is going to notice that there is a little something different about Omar. And while there are lots of low information voters, most people, no matter how stupid, realize on some level that guns do not walk into nightclubs and go on rampages by themselves. And there is the little detail that Omar was a professional security guard and even in most countries where they don't allow ordinary people to have guns, security guards have access to them.

    Besides being an obvious red herring, the anti-gun crowd has to explain how, if we are not going to build a fence (and god forbid we should do such a thing), it is possible to smuggle across 11 million human beings and mucho tons of drugs every year, but there's no way that guns will come across the border once we make them illegal here.

    You can TRY to change the subject but now you have the candidate of one of the two major parties loudly NOTICING and saying the I-word and it's going to be hard to memory hole Omar's pledge of allegiance to the Islamic State and retcon him into a hateful white man like George Zimmerman. Maybe if he had changed his name to Omar Zimmerman?

    You can denounce Trump as a badthinking racis' and try talking about guns instead but he is going to be on the teevee every day at least from now until November so it's not going to be that easy to shut him up like some poor schmuck whom you can force out of his job for having said a bad word. Even Hillary had to (reluctantly) say the I-word in order to avoid being outflanked by Trump or looking like a total fool.

    Replies: @Jefferson, @IBC, @Heretic

    Jack D’s point regarding the porousness of the border to guns goes under-noticed.

    You don’t have the luxury of holding the spigots full-to-open on illegals, drugs and other detritus with slack border controls, while selectively avoiding the bypassing of domestic gun policies via the same channels.

    Make the liars choose.

  220. @Svigor

    OT, sort of, but now Trump is proposing that guns not be sold to those on various terrorist watchlists:
     
    It's a bad idea because depriving citizens of their Constitutional rights without due process is an inherently bad idea, as well as un-American, but it's the kind of centrist tyranny that Trump is vulnerable to absorbing.

    But it could be good politics, because it's not going to make it to law, and it might attract tyrannical liberal voters.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    Dems want to ban guns.

    Trump wants to ban Muslims.

    What if Trump proposed as a compromise banning Muslims from buying guns?

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @Dave Pinsen

    Dave, if you are being serious, I can only surmise that

    A) You want to Trump to self-sabotage, and

    B) You have no love for the 2nd Amendment and don’t care if it is nullified.

    You’re one of the more logical commenters, so I’ll assume you realize that citizens and legal residents who happen to be Muslim won’t (and shouldn’t) have their constitutional rights suspended.

  221. Y’all are wasting your breath. For this crowd, it was all worth it if it kept one more Joo out of America. They’re not founding stock, you see.

    Tell it to the Israelis. There are millions of much smarter Chinamen ready to move in and run Israel much better than the Jews do, but the Israelis aren’t buying.

    We’re just following their lead.

    • Replies: @The Undiscovered Jew
    @Svigor

    For the last time you twit, the religion of Judaism is not the same thing as the Ashkenazic ethnicity.

    Israel allows Kaifeng Jews, who are ethnic Chinese who supposedly practice Judaism, to immigrate.

    Israel's religiously discriminatory immigration policy, if applied to the US, would allow any Christian in the world to immigrate here. That means almost all of Latin America and at least half of Subsaharan Africa would be eligible for green cards.

    You still want to adopt Israel's immigration standards to ours?

    Replies: @Brutusale

  222. @Bee
    @fredyetagain aka superhonky

    "Steve’s description of her as a Zionist had the effect in my mind of highlighting her monumental hypocrisy (i.e., Jews get their own state"

    Nope, she wasn't a hypocrite. Jews are an ethnicity. "Americans" are not and never have been an ethnic group. Why do Americans deserve their own country? Unless you mean indigenous Americans (no, not Ann Coulter).

    On the other hand, the English, Irish, Scottish, Dutch, Italian, Latvians, etc. do have their own countries. And in all of those countries, those ethnic groups still do make up a higher percentage of the population than Jews do in Israel (76% of Israel is Jewish).

    Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky

    “Why do Americans deserve their own country?”

    The answer to that question is self-evident to )))me((( and I would imagine most of Steve’s readers. Sorry it’s such a mystery to (((you))).

    • Replies: @Bee
    @fredyetagain aka superhonky

    The reason that "Why do Americans deserve their own country" isn't self-evident to me is that I don't know what the definition of "American" is in this context. You compared "Americans" to "Jews", which made no sense.

    Fred Trump was born in Queens, to German parents. Was he an American? Mary MacLeod Trump moved to America at eighteen, married an American-born man, and was a naturalized citizen. Was she American?

    Is their son American?

    Was Emma Lazarus American?

  223. @AnotherDad
    @Hare Krishna


    Not only would no 1924 Immigration Act mean America could have taken advantage of all that European talent, but it would have meant a much whiter America. Every city in America would be majority white today with the possible exception of DC. Neighborhoods like Steve’s family’s home turf of Austin in Chicago would still be safe places. America would have much lower crime, and much less gun violence. It would have also meant less nonwhite immigration nowadays.
     
    Jeez, more in-numerate nonsense.

    One thing i enjoy about going to iSteve is not just Steve but most of the commenters are at least marginally numerate and logically minded and while we disagree about the sociology of this or that group or this or that policy, generally the discussion is orders of magnitude more rational than the innumerate nonsense that emanates from these Ivy League BAs who control the national conversation.

    Your innumeracy:
    The US of 1960 was about 90% white and 10% black. Indians, Asians, Hispanics were essentially noise--1%.

    To move that say 5 points to 95% black--without just conducting a black genocide--requires ... *doubling* the white population of the United States.

    This is very well understood by anyone who is "numerate". It's very very hard to move up the percentage of something that is already at a high percentage. Doubling the percentage of something with a small percentage is relatively easy--and scales directly. For instance if you have 3% of widget market, doubling your sales gets you--assuming others remain the same--roughly 6% of the market. Doubling your sales when you have 90% does not get you to 180%, it gets you to about 95%. And it is *wildly* harder to do.

    Even without the 1924 Immigration Control Act, we would not have gotten a lot of immigration in the 1930s because our Great Depression was about the worst. (And if we didn't have immigration control before we'd certainly have gotten it then.) There was actually net emmigration from the US during some of the early years of the Depression. (We didn't even fill the quotas.) Perhaps in the immediate post-war we'd have taken in more people from Europe--there were hundreds of thousands. At the very max open immigration during this period and you'd be talking about maybe 10 million people and some like number of descendants. This would alter the white percentage by at most maybe 5 points. Barely on the cusp of noticeable. Essentially no affect on what you'd perceive about demography from driving around your neighborhoods or cities. Utterly swamped by the magnitude of post-1964 demographic change we've seen.

    The reasons for the falling white percentage of the population are
    -- relatively higher black fertility; due in part from welfare; which has declined to replacement post 90s
    -- lower, sub-replacement, white fertility, due to all the cultural and economic changes (especially feminism and female careerism)
    -- and--far and away the biggie--massive non-white post 1964 immigration

    If you want to live in a white society--and i do--then you need to tackle those causes. Most of all *stop immigration*. Then ideally get some black nationalism, Hispanic nationalism, white nationalism going and find a way to separate.

    Ultimately, you're going to have to recover white "mojo"--have whites *care* about preserving their race and culture.

    Replies: @Hare Krishna, @Perspective

    While moderate to high levels of European immigration post 1924 wouldn’t have made the US as a whole much whiter (probably keep the percentage of blacks at around 10 percent), there would certainly be an impact at the local level. This would be especially true in metro areas in the mid west and north east with higher levels of immigration. I think the great migration from the south would still happen, but its demographic affect would be somewhat blunted.

  224. @Nick Diaz
    The FACT is that 99.99999% of Muslim immigrants to both Europe and America do not committ terrorist acts and kill people. This is simply incontrovertible. Therefore, trying to argue that Muslims, as an entire religious group, should be prohibited from immigrating to the U.S as a deterrant to terrorist is asinine.

    And how nice of you, Sailer, to try to pass the 1924 Immigration Act as an anti-immigration bill. In reality, the primary argument for that Act was eugenicist, that southern Europeans such as Spaniards and Italians were biologically inferior to northern European stock, and that allowing large numbers of such immigrants would result in the deterioration of the genetic quality of the American people. This is a well-known historical fact. You know this very well, too. The problem is that it doesen't fit your conservative misrepresentation of history, that presents the America of old as a country where all ethnicities except for blacks held the same social status as WASPS.

    And your comment about gay interior decorators in the Trump Towers was hilarious because it shows what a blowhard you are. Yes, gay men are more feminine than heterosexual men on average. Who cares? They tend to be far superior to straight men at everything: they are overrepresentated among the greatest thinkers and artists, are more productive, there is a much higher proportion of gay men who are university-educated, working in the professions and they committ far less homicides, etc.

    It is easy to diagnose the typical Trump voter: white, male, heterosexual and without a college education. That is, the people who have been the most disenfranchised in America over the past 50 years. But it is not the "system", or "immigration" that is to blame here: no one is forcing white heterosexual males to not try to earn an education, to be indolent and to get drunk on cheap beer every day instead of bettering themselves. Look at Asians. They came to this country with an even bigger handicap, they almost never take advantage of Affirmative Action and yet they are over-represented in the professions and the top earning brackets. The angry white heterosexual males have the freedom to better themselves and most of the misery in their lives they can only blame on themselves.

    The proof that white males can do very well and that the "system" is not to blame is evident because there are white ethinicities that came to America over the past 50 years that have done very well for themselves, such as Ukranians, Poles and Cubans.

    Low-class white American males will blame anyone but themselves and their own proclivities for their sad predicament.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @johnny memeonic, @Jack D, @AnotherDad, @Lurker

    Try to imagine the scene, perhaps a backroom in a government building, in some formerly white, nominally Christian country.

    “You know, I’ve been thinking, what we really need round here is millions of Muslims from the 3rd world. Come on guys, who’s with me?!”

    What was the problem that mass importation of Muslims was the solution to?

  225. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @The Undiscovered Jew
    @Jack D

    They have no evidence Jews ethnically benefit from immigration except for MacDonald's bogus history of immigration lobbying.

    According to Barry Mehler he distorted what his sources said about Jews and immigration lobbying to falsely imply Jews before WWII wanted multicultural immigration (the actual sources say they were limited to helping Jewish refugees escape persecution).

    And there other examples of MacDonald - the only source antisemites have for their interpretation of Jewish immigration lobbying - lying.

    I want an explanation for how this doesn't qualify as a lie and why Jews should accept MacDonald's history as anything but a con:

    1) MacDonald refers to a study about authoritarianism among religious groups and claims the results prove Jews are highly authoritarian.

    2) The actual study says Jews tied with Anglicans and Unitarians for being among the least authoritarian of all measured religious groups.



    http://web.archive.org/web/20090411051702/http://www.people.hbs.edu/dlieberman/lieberman.jewsRaceEmpire.pdf

    Kevin MacDonald:

    Altemeyer (1988, 2) defines “right-wing authoritarianism” as involving three central attributes: submission to legitimate authority; aggression toward individuals that is sanctioned by the authorities; adherence to social conventions. Clearly, individuals high on these traits would be ideal members of cohesive human group evolutionary strategies. Indeed, such attributes would define the ideal Jew in traditional societies: submissive to the kehilla authorities, strongly adherent to within – group social conventions such as the observance of Jewish religious law, and characterized by negative attitudes toward gentile society and culture seen as manifestations of an outgroup. Consistent with this formulation, high scorers on the Right-Wing Authoritarianism Scale (RWA) tend to be highly religious; they tend to be the most orthodox members of their denomination; they believe in group cohesiveness, group loyalty, and identify strongly with ingroups

    (Altemeyer 1994, 134; 1996, 84). Without question, traditional Jewish society and contemporary Jewish Orthodox and fundamentalist groups are highly authoritarian by any measure. Indeed, Rubenstein (1996) found that Orthodox Jews were higher on RWA than “traditional Jews,” and both of these groups were higher than secular Jews.59

    The real study:

    [A]re “very accepting” subjects equally authoritarian in all religions? Or do different denominations (as argued earlier) produce different levels of authoritarianism even among the strongly committed? If we examine just those subjects who answered the (0-5) “still accept” question with either a “4” or a “5” (that is, they indicated they “nearly completely” or “completely” accepted the religious beliefs taught them in childhood), who do you think were the most authoritarian of all these “true believers”? Fundamentalists (185.1) and Mennonites (185.3) among the students, Mennonites (202.1) and Fundamentalists (208.5) among the parents. The (rarer) United Church members, Anglicans, and Jews who were just as accepting of their religions scored about 25 points lower. True-believing Catholics and Lutherans lay somewhere in between. 61

    So not only are Jews among the least authoritarian of religious groups, according to Altemeyer highly religious Jews are among the least authoritarian of the highly religious.

    Yet in an awe-inspiring display of sheer gall (dare I say, 'chutzpah'?), MacDonald takes information Altemeyer has collected from studies of subjects explicitly identified as “White North Americans” and applies it willy-nilly to the Jews whom Altemeyer, working from actual data rather than his own 'suppositions,' largely exempts from the discussion. The point is worth emphasizing: these highly ethnocentric, highly authoritarian, highly self-deceptive “people who are highly attracted to cohesive groups,” as MacDonald so guardedly puts it, whom MacDonald adduces as evidence for the self-deceptive tendencies of Jewish “hyper-collectivism,” were in fact members of MacDonald's own ethnic group. I can think of no other way to describe this conduct than as an act of deliberate fraud.

    Replies: @ben tillman, @ben tillman, @anon, @anon

    People should google KMac’s work on Jewish lobbying for open borders and judge for themselves.

    1) It made perfect sense for Jews to be pro open borders when they didn’t have a homeland of their own – it’s an act of hostile cultural warfare but borne of a unique situation maybe extenuates it.

    However now they do have a homeland, being pro open borders everywhere except Israel is cultural warfare with no extenuating circumstances.

    2) All the Jews I’ve ever known were actively open borders (except for Israel).

    3) I’ve known c. 6 Jews who moved to Japan and all of them are engaged in open borders activities over there also.

    4) Anyone who’s spent a long time arguing about immigration online knows who the biggest screechers are.

    5) US msm is swarming with open borders Jewish pundits.

    So i’m going to guess KMac’s research on this issue is likely to be correct.

    • Replies: @grmbl
    @anon


    2) All the Jews I’ve ever known were actively open borders (except for Israel).

    3) I’ve known c. 6 Jews who moved to Japan and all of them are engaged in open borders activities over there also.
     

    You should put a little more care into crafting your lies, the above two are especially blatant and ruin your "argument" (which is specious anyway).

    Yeah, Israel. I could show you a lengthy, scholarly article by an Israeli professor where he makes the case for the right of the majority population in any country (not just Israel) to preserve itself against unchecked immigration. Then, I could show you the responses from European scholars (none of them Jewish) who excoriate him for insisting on the sovereign right of the people to decide who can immigrate. One of them solves the problem by demanding that Euro majority populations resign themselves already now to future minority status.

    It's fascinating reading. Only, Sailer will never run this story. Doesn't fit in with his Narrative.

    , @The Undiscovered Jew
    @anon

    People should google KMac’s work on Jewish lobbying for open borders and judge for themselves.

    Which version of MacDonald's work should we believe - the one where MacDonald says Jews, unlike other white ethnicities who lobbied for their own ethnic group, wanted open borders for every ethnicity before WWII.

    Or should we believe the other half of his work - his actual sources - which say Jews WERE lobbying ONLY to help their own Jewish co-ethnics up to WWII.

    , @Lot
    @anon

    Yeah right you know 6 Jews who moved to Japan and all became open boarders advocates but don't know ANY who are not "actively open boarders."

    The first group could not be more than 1 in 100,000 Jews. But you claim to know six of them.

    The second group, anyone other than "actively open boarders" is like the vast majority of Jews. But you don't know a single one, despite knowing 6 Jews who moved to Japan. I have a half Jewish family, went to a heavy-Jew college, and have Jewish friends, neighbors, co-workers etc. And I don't know a single one who moved to Japan. But you know six of them.

    You are a filthy liar, and did does not surprise me you can't even be bothered to use a pseudonym, as people would quickly ignore it.

  226. @The Undiscovered Jew
    @Jack D

    They have no evidence Jews ethnically benefit from immigration except for MacDonald's bogus history of immigration lobbying.

    According to Barry Mehler he distorted what his sources said about Jews and immigration lobbying to falsely imply Jews before WWII wanted multicultural immigration (the actual sources say they were limited to helping Jewish refugees escape persecution).

    And there other examples of MacDonald - the only source antisemites have for their interpretation of Jewish immigration lobbying - lying.

    I want an explanation for how this doesn't qualify as a lie and why Jews should accept MacDonald's history as anything but a con:

    1) MacDonald refers to a study about authoritarianism among religious groups and claims the results prove Jews are highly authoritarian.

    2) The actual study says Jews tied with Anglicans and Unitarians for being among the least authoritarian of all measured religious groups.



    http://web.archive.org/web/20090411051702/http://www.people.hbs.edu/dlieberman/lieberman.jewsRaceEmpire.pdf

    Kevin MacDonald:

    Altemeyer (1988, 2) defines “right-wing authoritarianism” as involving three central attributes: submission to legitimate authority; aggression toward individuals that is sanctioned by the authorities; adherence to social conventions. Clearly, individuals high on these traits would be ideal members of cohesive human group evolutionary strategies. Indeed, such attributes would define the ideal Jew in traditional societies: submissive to the kehilla authorities, strongly adherent to within – group social conventions such as the observance of Jewish religious law, and characterized by negative attitudes toward gentile society and culture seen as manifestations of an outgroup. Consistent with this formulation, high scorers on the Right-Wing Authoritarianism Scale (RWA) tend to be highly religious; they tend to be the most orthodox members of their denomination; they believe in group cohesiveness, group loyalty, and identify strongly with ingroups

    (Altemeyer 1994, 134; 1996, 84). Without question, traditional Jewish society and contemporary Jewish Orthodox and fundamentalist groups are highly authoritarian by any measure. Indeed, Rubenstein (1996) found that Orthodox Jews were higher on RWA than “traditional Jews,” and both of these groups were higher than secular Jews.59

    The real study:

    [A]re “very accepting” subjects equally authoritarian in all religions? Or do different denominations (as argued earlier) produce different levels of authoritarianism even among the strongly committed? If we examine just those subjects who answered the (0-5) “still accept” question with either a “4” or a “5” (that is, they indicated they “nearly completely” or “completely” accepted the religious beliefs taught them in childhood), who do you think were the most authoritarian of all these “true believers”? Fundamentalists (185.1) and Mennonites (185.3) among the students, Mennonites (202.1) and Fundamentalists (208.5) among the parents. The (rarer) United Church members, Anglicans, and Jews who were just as accepting of their religions scored about 25 points lower. True-believing Catholics and Lutherans lay somewhere in between. 61

    So not only are Jews among the least authoritarian of religious groups, according to Altemeyer highly religious Jews are among the least authoritarian of the highly religious.

    Yet in an awe-inspiring display of sheer gall (dare I say, 'chutzpah'?), MacDonald takes information Altemeyer has collected from studies of subjects explicitly identified as “White North Americans” and applies it willy-nilly to the Jews whom Altemeyer, working from actual data rather than his own 'suppositions,' largely exempts from the discussion. The point is worth emphasizing: these highly ethnocentric, highly authoritarian, highly self-deceptive “people who are highly attracted to cohesive groups,” as MacDonald so guardedly puts it, whom MacDonald adduces as evidence for the self-deceptive tendencies of Jewish “hyper-collectivism,” were in fact members of MacDonald's own ethnic group. I can think of no other way to describe this conduct than as an act of deliberate fraud.

    Replies: @ben tillman, @ben tillman, @anon, @anon

    They have no evidence Jews ethnically benefit from immigration

    They don’t need to benefit – and with the current mass Muslim immigration almost certainly won’t – evolved paranoia as a result of 20 centuries as a wandering minority seems like a perfectly plausible explanation.

  227. @Lot
    The 1920's immigration policy was a bad idea in retrospect. Absent its passage, probably another 300,000 or so Jews would have come from eastern europe in the 20's and 30's and perhaps another million in the 1940's. Of that ~1.6 million, probably 1 million were killed in the Holocaust.

    WWII would have also been at least a little less vicious if some of Europe's excess young people had come to the USA. And we would have defeated Nazi Germany sooner if we had greater manpower and Germany had fewer human resources to exploit for its defense.

    Replies: @Hare Krishna, @anon

    You go from saying Jews don’t push open borders for everywhere except Israel to pushing open borders.

    I think it’s genetic.

  228. @grmbl
    @The Undiscovered Jew

    What do you want from Steve? Should he apologize? Should he admit that he knew all along that MacDonald is a fraud?

    He can't and won't do that. A big part of iSteve ideology is the idea that Jews have supplanted WASPs as the ruling caste of America, that they are Israel-firsters, that they harm the American people by pushing for more third-world immigration, that they demoralize and depress gentiles for competitive advantage by means of memorializing the Holocaust, and so on and so forth. The Jew as parasite sucking the lifeblood out of the host nation. This draws much of his readership (although he deletes many of their most hateful comments every day.)

    Because Steve's brand of antisemitism is not the torches-and-pitchfork kind, not genocidal, he claims that he is not an antisemite. Ultimately no one can know what he really believes. Maybe it's never been more than a coldly calculated cynical ploy to cultivate some of the fertile ground left untilled by Stormfront.

    Replies: @anon, @Charles Erwin Wilson, @The Undiscovered Jew, @anon

    You people are insane.

    I advise everyone to read MacDonald and make their own mind up.

    • Replies: @The Undiscovered Jew
    @anon

    He's been caught multiple times lying about what his own sources say.

    I notice you don't argue he quoted that study about religious authoritarianism correctly - and all I referred to was a word-for-word quote from the real study and MacDonald's falsification of the results in MacDonald's own words.

    If he will twist something like that out (and be foolish enough to think no one would catch him) his immigration history should be presumed to also be false.

    Unless you can give direct quotes from his sources to back up his interpretation.

    If he is honest than explain why the authoritarian survey results are the precise OPPOSITE of what he said they were?

  229. @Lot
    @ben tillman

    So in a hypothetical judenfrei USA, we never had mass immigration? Really?

    Sorry bud, but white gentiles have always been happy to sell out their brothers and their grandchildren to make a quick buck with cheap non-white labor. It wasn't the Jews who brought blacks to America, it wasn't Jews who freed them, and it is not the Jews who own most of the Central Valley Farms and other Big Ag industries that, relative to their economic size, are the single biggest promoters of low-IQ peasant immigration to the United States.

    It was an anti-semite, Henry Ford, who was most responsible for bringing southern blacks up north in place of the German and Eastern European immigrants that traditionally worked in northern factories. Immigration from Europe, as I noted before, had reduced the non-white share of the United States from 20% in 1830 to 10% in 1930. It was, in part, anti-semites and Nordicists who shut that process down.

    Jews are far from innocent in these matters, and I will not argue against the claim that we have a disproportionate share of the responsibility for the degradation of the American stock.

    Replies: @Perspective, @The Undiscovered Jew, @anon

    It wasn’t the Jews who brought blacks to America

    Yes it was.

    The first sugar plantations were set up on the Atlantic islands by Jews.

    The resulting genetics – mixed African and Jewish – are all over central America (and the ex-Spanish bits of USA).

  230. @grmbl
    @Charles Erwin Wilson

    Read what I wrote again. For all I know, in his heart of hearts Steve is completely indifferent to Jews. With a sufficiently creative imagination, you could even posit that he is secretly philosemitic but broadcasts his style of late 19th-century antisemitism because he wants to draw susceptible people away from the more hardcore kind. Being a "cynical bastard" myself, I lean towards a more commercial explanation.

    Replies: @anon

    The msm is overflowing with Jewish pundits promoting open borders for everywhere except Israel.

    • Replies: @The Undiscovered Jew
    @anon

    That means nothing. Gentile pundits are also overwhelmingly open borders, both here and in Europe where the Jewish problem with dealt with only to have the Jews replaced with gentile liberals.

    For all of the bloviating about Jewish overrepresentation, it still only shows Jewish participation in ideas gentile liberals also supported and not that you'd be in any better shape if Jews had no political power.

    Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax

  231. @Realist
    @Leftist conservative

    You are absolutely right. Our economy is dependent on population growth

    Replies: @anon

    no it isn’t – it’s being destroyed by population growth

    mass immigration = down pressure on wages + upward pressure on housing costs = stagnation

    the cheap labor lobby who own the media won’t admit it because they personally are still benefiting from the cheap labor

    • Replies: @Realist
    @anon

    Without population growth the economy becomes stagnant. It is true that the rich elite get richer from cheap imported labor. But the pressure for cheap labor is increased by the lack of indigenous population growth(new customers). Greed is at the core of the Ponzi scheme.

    Replies: @anon

  232. @Dave Pinsen
    @Svigor

    Dems want to ban guns.

    Trump wants to ban Muslims.

    What if Trump proposed as a compromise banning Muslims from buying guns?

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Dave, if you are being serious, I can only surmise that

    A) You want to Trump to self-sabotage, and

    B) You have no love for the 2nd Amendment and don’t care if it is nullified.

    You’re one of the more logical commenters, so I’ll assume you realize that citizens and legal residents who happen to be Muslim won’t (and shouldn’t) have their constitutional rights suspended.

  233. “I think you’ve got a few too many 9′s going there, but regardless. Let’s say we were talking here about a Chinese manufacturer of say computer monitors. 99.99x% of the time, the monitors that they sell you are relatively harmless, but the remaining .001% of the time, they explode violently and wipe out an entire office or public gathering place, killing dozens. Would you accept this situation or would you demand that the importation of these monitors be halted until the problem was corrected?”

    Your analogy is terrible. If a computer monitor from a given manufacturer explodes, that means that there might be something wrong in their manufacturing process that resulted in such incident. Therefore, it makes sense to recall all the computers, since the process used to make all of them was the same, which means that the particular fault that resulted in the incident can be in any of them.

    But Muslims are individual people with different personalities. There is nothing about the personality and intentions of a particular Muslim that committed a terrorist act that would, logically, transfer to all other Muslims by default and lead them to committ terrorist acts well. Therefore, your analogy does not apply.

  234. “Nick, I was going to call out your utter innumeracy–or perhaps confusion about what “FACT” means–but i see that Andrew and Jack have beaten me to it.

    Let me throw in the larger point though: It’s not just terrorism it’s continual *contention*. Having a nation with a bunch of muslims in it means continual contention, continual strife. Muslims simply do not play well with others–particularly Christians and Jews but also Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, etc. etc.

    Furthermore … i just don’t want them around! My ancestors built this nation, and i simply *do not want* to deal with muslims. Don’t want to see their veiled\burka’d women, hear their call to pray, observe their holidays, negotiate swimming pool hours for them, have my descendants subjected to “tolerance” propaganda about them.

    And that’s enough! There is no *right* to immigrate into the United States (or anywhere else). More muslims provide absolutely no benefit to Americans–other than for muslims already here trying to get more of co-religionists in to further mess up the joint. Their presence is bad for Americans\America … and that, and that alone is the standard for judging immigration: Does it make life *better* for Americans. Generally that answer is “no”–immigration is generally a bad thing for the people being immigrated upon. But for Muslims it is a resounding … “no!”

    More Muslims makes life worse for Americans so they absolutely should not be allowed to come. QED.”

    Trust me, buddy, you coudn’t call me out on anything ever. Of that, you can be sure.

    There is pretty muchn nothing to refute in what you wrote, since youe entire argument is:

    “I don’t like Muslims! I want them out!”

    What else could I possibly reply to this except to point out the obvious that you are ethnocentric and xenophobic?

  235. “But it’s not asinine it’s 100% effective. And it isn’t a deterrent. It’s a preventative. No Muslims, no Muslim crime, and none of the rest of the annoying presence of Muslims, which others have detailed.”

    Running criminal checks and for association with radical Islamic groups is also 100% effective at eliminating the threat of radical Islam, and much fairer to the peaceful, civilized Muslims.

    You are just a hate-filled bigot. And not a particularly bright one.

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    @Nick Diaz

    You can't run effective background checks on people from countries that don't keep reliable records.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    , @grmbl
    @Nick Diaz


    Running criminal checks and for association with radical Islamic groups is also 100% effective at eliminating the threat of radical Islam
     
    You, sir, are speaking through an orifice which is not your mouth.

    San Bernardino jihad murderer was vetted by FIVE different government agencies
  236. What was the problem that mass importation of Muslims was the solution to?

    What’s really behind Muslim immigration into the USA is oil money from Muslim countries making its way into the bank accounts of both Dem. and Repub. politicians.

    Also, starting in the time of Dick Nixon, The US Treasury has become dependent on Saudi A. and the Muslim oil city-states recycling oil revenue into US Treasury bonds.

    Similarly for American universities and think tanks.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
  237. @Nick Diaz
    @Svigor

    "But it’s not asinine it’s 100% effective. And it isn’t a deterrent. It’s a preventative. No Muslims, no Muslim crime, and none of the rest of the annoying presence of Muslims, which others have detailed."

    Running criminal checks and for association with radical Islamic groups is also 100% effective at eliminating the threat of radical Islam, and much fairer to the peaceful, civilized Muslims.

    You are just a hate-filled bigot. And not a particularly bright one.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @grmbl

    You can’t run effective background checks on people from countries that don’t keep reliable records.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Dave Pinsen

    “These days, somebody arrives in California from Gautelombia and wants to buy a house, do you think they make him document his credit history? It’s in Spanish, and who knows how many million pesetas were worth a dollar in 1985, and besides, the courthouse in El Carrumbo collapsed in an earthquake anyway, so he doesn’t have a paper trail. Documents? He’s undocumented. He don’t need no steenking documents! He just pays some extra points on his rate, but that’s all on the backend. Everybody’s happy."

    http://isteve.blogspot.com/2010/03/unreal-estate.html

  238. @anon
    @Realist

    no it isn't - it's being destroyed by population growth

    mass immigration = down pressure on wages + upward pressure on housing costs = stagnation

    the cheap labor lobby who own the media won't admit it because they personally are still benefiting from the cheap labor

    Replies: @Realist

    Without population growth the economy becomes stagnant. It is true that the rich elite get richer from cheap imported labor. But the pressure for cheap labor is increased by the lack of indigenous population growth(new customers). Greed is at the core of the Ponzi scheme.

    • Replies: @anon
    @Realist


    Without population growth the economy becomes stagnant.
     
    Why is that believed to be the case? Because population growth increases total demand right. So the population growth argument actually boils down to: without increasing total disposable income the economy becomes stagnant.

    Yes they *believe* population growth provides increasing total disposable income but it doesn't because of immigration's dual effect of downward pressure on wages combined with upward pressure on housing costs.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-14/rent-london-consuming-57-millennials-income

    Without the 1965 immigration act if say 50% of the massive productivity improvements in the USA since then had gone to the workforce instead of 100% to employers that would have led to a constant increase in disposable income over the last 50 years from the existing population and we'd have the flying cars we were p[romised in old sci fi.

    It didn't happen because of the 1965 act.

    #

    case 1: start point
    100 people with $100/week spare = $10,000

    case 2: mass immigration
    400 people with $20/week spare =$8000

    case 3: no immigration + productivity gains
    100 people wit $150/week spare = $15,000

  239. @anon
    @The Undiscovered Jew

    People should google KMac's work on Jewish lobbying for open borders and judge for themselves.

    1) It made perfect sense for Jews to be pro open borders when they didn't have a homeland of their own - it's an act of hostile cultural warfare but borne of a unique situation maybe extenuates it.

    However now they do have a homeland, being pro open borders everywhere except Israel is cultural warfare with no extenuating circumstances.

    2) All the Jews I've ever known were actively open borders (except for Israel).

    3) I've known c. 6 Jews who moved to Japan and all of them are engaged in open borders activities over there also.

    4) Anyone who's spent a long time arguing about immigration online knows who the biggest screechers are.

    5) US msm is swarming with open borders Jewish pundits.

    So i'm going to guess KMac's research on this issue is likely to be correct.

    Replies: @grmbl, @The Undiscovered Jew, @Lot

    2) All the Jews I’ve ever known were actively open borders (except for Israel).

    3) I’ve known c. 6 Jews who moved to Japan and all of them are engaged in open borders activities over there also.

    You should put a little more care into crafting your lies, the above two are especially blatant and ruin your “argument” (which is specious anyway).

    Yeah, Israel. I could show you a lengthy, scholarly article by an Israeli professor where he makes the case for the right of the majority population in any country (not just Israel) to preserve itself against unchecked immigration. Then, I could show you the responses from European scholars (none of them Jewish) who excoriate him for insisting on the sovereign right of the people to decide who can immigrate. One of them solves the problem by demanding that Euro majority populations resign themselves already now to future minority status.

    It’s fascinating reading. Only, Sailer will never run this story. Doesn’t fit in with his Narrative.

  240. @Nick Diaz
    @Svigor

    "But it’s not asinine it’s 100% effective. And it isn’t a deterrent. It’s a preventative. No Muslims, no Muslim crime, and none of the rest of the annoying presence of Muslims, which others have detailed."

    Running criminal checks and for association with radical Islamic groups is also 100% effective at eliminating the threat of radical Islam, and much fairer to the peaceful, civilized Muslims.

    You are just a hate-filled bigot. And not a particularly bright one.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @grmbl

    Running criminal checks and for association with radical Islamic groups is also 100% effective at eliminating the threat of radical Islam

    You, sir, are speaking through an orifice which is not your mouth.

    San Bernardino jihad murderer was vetted by FIVE different government agencies

  241. @Svigor

    The FACT is that 99.99999% of Muslim immigrants to both Europe and America do not committ terrorist acts and kill people. This is simply incontrovertible. Therefore, trying to argue that Muslims, as an entire religious group, should be prohibited from immigrating to the U.S as a deterrant to terrorist is asinine.
     
    But it's not asinine it's 100% effective. And it isn't a deterrent. It's a preventative. No Muslims, no Muslim crime, and none of the rest of the annoying presence of Muslims, which others have detailed.

    Replies: @Diversity Heretic

    Japan has virtually no Muslims (I think 40,000 in a nation of over 100 million) and no Muslim terrorism. I think the two factors are related.

  242. @Anonymous
    @Lot

    I hate that poem.Can't we give that lousy statue to mexico or better yet,Israel?

    Replies: @Chris Mallory, @Buzz Mohawk, @oh its just me too

    I hate almost as much as the baby boomer anthem “imagine”

  243. @Dave Pinsen
    @Nick Diaz

    You can't run effective background checks on people from countries that don't keep reliable records.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    “These days, somebody arrives in California from Gautelombia and wants to buy a house, do you think they make him document his credit history? It’s in Spanish, and who knows how many million pesetas were worth a dollar in 1985, and besides, the courthouse in El Carrumbo collapsed in an earthquake anyway, so he doesn’t have a paper trail. Documents? He’s undocumented. He don’t need no steenking documents! He just pays some extra points on his rate, but that’s all on the backend. Everybody’s happy.”

    http://isteve.blogspot.com/2010/03/unreal-estate.html

  244. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Realist
    @anon

    Without population growth the economy becomes stagnant. It is true that the rich elite get richer from cheap imported labor. But the pressure for cheap labor is increased by the lack of indigenous population growth(new customers). Greed is at the core of the Ponzi scheme.

    Replies: @anon

    Without population growth the economy becomes stagnant.

    Why is that believed to be the case? Because population growth increases total demand right. So the population growth argument actually boils down to: without increasing total disposable income the economy becomes stagnant.

    Yes they *believe* population growth provides increasing total disposable income but it doesn’t because of immigration’s dual effect of downward pressure on wages combined with upward pressure on housing costs.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-14/rent-london-consuming-57-millennials-income

    Without the 1965 immigration act if say 50% of the massive productivity improvements in the USA since then had gone to the workforce instead of 100% to employers that would have led to a constant increase in disposable income over the last 50 years from the existing population and we’d have the flying cars we were p[romised in old sci fi.

    It didn’t happen because of the 1965 act.

    #

    case 1: start point
    100 people with $100/week spare = $10,000

    case 2: mass immigration
    400 people with $20/week spare =$8000

    case 3: no immigration + productivity gains
    100 people wit $150/week spare = $15,000

  245. But no, always the same old conspiracy theories get trotted out. The drive for world domination by a ruthless cabal.

    McDonald clearly gets under you guys’ skin. Hence the absurd non-sequiturs about world domination, ruthless cabals, and conspiracy theories, while the only genuine criticism amounts to nitpicking, at best.

    “Steve’s description of her as a Zionist had the effect in my mind of highlighting her monumental hypocrisy (i.e., Jews get their own state”

    Nope, she wasn’t a hypocrite. Jews are an ethnicity. “Americans” are not and never have been an ethnic group. Why do Americans deserve their own country?

    With self-serving (and Jewish Supremacist) special pleading like this, who needs conspiracy theories?

    Meanwhile, some other audience is getting the “Israeli Jewry is multicultural and multi-ethnic” treatment. And another is getting the “Jewry is a religious, not ethnic, group” treatment. Et cetera.

    The answer to that question is self-evident to )))me((( and I would imagine most of Steve’s readers. Sorry it’s such a mystery to (((you))).

    Lol.

    People should google KMac’s work on Jewish lobbying for open borders and judge for themselves.

    Indeed. I don’t bother defending MacDonald, he does just fine on his own. People who want to honestly assess need only be literate and curious.

    Your analogy is terrible.

    You’re too stupid to assess the worth of analogies.

    • Replies: @The Undiscovered Jew
    @Svigor

    Svigor, if I'm wrong then explain how this isn't a lie - use that big brain of yours to come up with a plausible excuse for this one:



    http://web.archive.org/web/20090411051702/http://www.people.hbs.edu/dlieberman/lieberman.jewsRaceEmpire.pdf

    Kevin MacDonald:

    Altemeyer (1988, 2) defines “right-wing authoritarianism” as involving three central attributes: submission to legitimate authority; aggression toward individuals that is sanctioned by the authorities; adherence to social conventions. Clearly, individuals high on these traits would be ideal members of cohesive human group evolutionary strategies. Indeed, such attributes would define the ideal Jew in traditional societies: submissive to the kehilla authorities, strongly adherent to within – group social conventions such as the observance of Jewish religious law, and characterized by negative attitudes toward gentile society and culture seen as manifestations of an outgroup. Consistent with this formulation, high scorers on the Right-Wing Authoritarianism Scale (RWA) tend to be highly religious; they tend to be the most orthodox members of their denomination; they believe in group cohesiveness, group loyalty, and identify strongly with ingroups

    (Altemeyer 1994, 134; 1996, 84). Without question, traditional Jewish society and contemporary Jewish Orthodox and fundamentalist groups are highly authoritarian by any measure. Indeed, Rubenstein (1996) found that Orthodox Jews were higher on RWA than “traditional Jews,” and both of these groups were higher than secular Jews.59

    The real study:

    [A]re “very accepting” subjects equally authoritarian in all religions? Or do different denominations (as argued earlier) produce different levels of authoritarianism even among the strongly committed? If we examine just those subjects who answered the (0-5) “still accept” question with either a “4” or a “5” (that is, they indicated they “nearly completely” or “completely” accepted the religious beliefs taught them in childhood), who do you think were the most authoritarian of all these “true believers”? Fundamentalists (185.1) and Mennonites (185.3) among the students, Mennonites (202.1) and Fundamentalists (208.5) among the parents. The (rarer) United Church members, Anglicans, and Jews who were just as accepting of their religions scored about 25 points lower. True-believing Catholics and Lutherans lay somewhere in between. 61

    So not only are Jews among the least authoritarian of religious groups, according to Altemeyer highly religious Jews are among the least authoritarian of the highly religious.

    Yet in an awe-inspiring display of sheer gall (dare I say, 'chutzpah'?), MacDonald takes information Altemeyer has collected from studies of subjects explicitly identified as “White North Americans” and applies it willy-nilly to the Jews whom Altemeyer, working from actual data rather than his own 'suppositions,' largely exempts from the discussion. The point is worth emphasizing: these highly ethnocentric, highly authoritarian, highly self-deceptive “people who are highly attracted to cohesive groups,” as MacDonald so guardedly puts it, whom MacDonald adduces as evidence for the self-deceptive tendencies of Jewish “hyper-collectivism,” were in fact members of MacDonald's own ethnic group. I can think of no other way to describe this conduct than as an act of deliberate fraud.

    , @Bee
    @Svigor

    "With self-serving (and Jewish Supremacist) special pleading like this"

    It's "Jewish Supremacism" to say that Jews deserve their own country? Then is it Norwegian supremacism to say that Norwegians should have their own country, too? I've never thought of myself as a Norwegian supremacist, but I'll take it.

    Sorry, but I still fail to see why old-stock WASP Americans deserve their own country, unencumbered by (in the context of Lazarus' 19th century poem) Irish, Italian, Polish, and Jewish immigration. Did old-stock WASP Americans deserve their own country in the year 1500, too?

  246. 1990’s Bill Clinton = America’s first black president.
    2016 Donald Trump = America’s first gay president. Seriously?

    Of course, perhaps the potential divide among the LGBT community will resemble the straight community at large: Gay men supporting Trump while lesbians will tend to support Hillary.

    Truly the LGBT community has multiple choices for this election: Vote either for America’s first G president, or vote for America’s first L president. In his article written some years go “Why lesbians aren’t gay”, Steve made mention of the total percentages of gays vs. lesbian. Either there are more gay men than lesbians or its close. If there are more gay men, and in light of the fact that more gays than lesbians died in the Orlando tragedy, that would tend to mean that Trump could potentially carry the gay vote, or at least garner a significant percentage of them. The lesbians probably will come out full force in favor of Hillary. But since gays aren’t usually hanging much with lesbians they will be free to seriously consider voting for Trump.

    And Trump now has an ally into the LGBT community, gay tech conservative Milo Yiannopoulos who has been full throttle in his support of Trump. Gays may not like Milo’s conservative politics but they will at least give a fair hearing since he is one of the members and so he could prove most persuasive.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    I will say again that you all should check out Milo over at Breitbart.com. He is smart, a good talker, and has been courageous about going onto college campuses to debate the loonies. He got punched out recently at DePaul: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unoBT8Te13g

  247. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    1990's Bill Clinton = America's first black president.
    2016 Donald Trump = America's first gay president. Seriously?

    Of course, perhaps the potential divide among the LGBT community will resemble the straight community at large: Gay men supporting Trump while lesbians will tend to support Hillary.

    Truly the LGBT community has multiple choices for this election: Vote either for America's first G president, or vote for America's first L president. In his article written some years go "Why lesbians aren't gay", Steve made mention of the total percentages of gays vs. lesbian. Either there are more gay men than lesbians or its close. If there are more gay men, and in light of the fact that more gays than lesbians died in the Orlando tragedy, that would tend to mean that Trump could potentially carry the gay vote, or at least garner a significant percentage of them. The lesbians probably will come out full force in favor of Hillary. But since gays aren't usually hanging much with lesbians they will be free to seriously consider voting for Trump.

    And Trump now has an ally into the LGBT community, gay tech conservative Milo Yiannopoulos who has been full throttle in his support of Trump. Gays may not like Milo's conservative politics but they will at least give a fair hearing since he is one of the members and so he could prove most persuasive.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

    I will say again that you all should check out Milo over at Breitbart.com. He is smart, a good talker, and has been courageous about going onto college campuses to debate the loonies. He got punched out recently at DePaul:

  248. @grmbl
    @The Undiscovered Jew

    The puzzling thing to me is, why the eagerness to follow a self-evident fraud like MacDonald ... when there are plenty of things that are uniquely annoying in Jews and undisputably true?

    Look at #168 by Chrisnonymous above. Harsh words about Lazarus, and by extension, Jews like her. But C...nonymous backs up his argument at every step with evidence. In this case, a close reading of the poem; another time, he might talk about how Jews like to drive everyone else up the wall by being needlessly argumentative all the time. Plenty of evidence for that assertion, too.

    But no, always the same old conspiracy theories get trotted out. The drive for world domination by a ruthless cabal. A clannish group of master schemers as the tail wagging a 100x bigger dog. Wizards of deception and manipulation. Protocols of the Elders of Zion, updated and modified with a "group-evolutionary" veneer but essentially unchanged.

    Replies: @The Undiscovered Jew

    Chrisnonymous

    I agree with everything you wrote except that analysis of the poem. Chrisnonymous makes a nice demonstration that the problem with antisemitism is overanalysis of Jewish actions to find hostile intentions. In his case he reads deep, cryptic meaning that doesn’t exist into a straight forward poem about Jewish immigrants.

    • Replies: @grmbl
    @The Undiscovered Jew

    But the poem is always sold to us as championing immigration for any and all who want to come. Are you now agreeing with C.nymous that it was only ever about Jewish immigration? (What did Lazarus say about her intentions with the poem?)

  249. @Svigor

    Y’all are wasting your breath. For this crowd, it was all worth it if it kept one more Joo out of America. They’re not founding stock, you see.
     
    Tell it to the Israelis. There are millions of much smarter Chinamen ready to move in and run Israel much better than the Jews do, but the Israelis aren't buying.

    We're just following their lead.

    Replies: @The Undiscovered Jew

    For the last time you twit, the religion of Judaism is not the same thing as the Ashkenazic ethnicity.

    Israel allows Kaifeng Jews, who are ethnic Chinese who supposedly practice Judaism, to immigrate.

    Israel’s religiously discriminatory immigration policy, if applied to the US, would allow any Christian in the world to immigrate here. That means almost all of Latin America and at least half of Subsaharan Africa would be eligible for green cards.

    You still want to adopt Israel’s immigration standards to ours?

    • Replies: @Brutusale
    @The Undiscovered Jew

    Do the Israelis force contraception on the Kaifeng like the did the Ethiopians they allowed to immigrate?

  250. @anon
    @The Undiscovered Jew

    People should google KMac's work on Jewish lobbying for open borders and judge for themselves.

    1) It made perfect sense for Jews to be pro open borders when they didn't have a homeland of their own - it's an act of hostile cultural warfare but borne of a unique situation maybe extenuates it.

    However now they do have a homeland, being pro open borders everywhere except Israel is cultural warfare with no extenuating circumstances.

    2) All the Jews I've ever known were actively open borders (except for Israel).

    3) I've known c. 6 Jews who moved to Japan and all of them are engaged in open borders activities over there also.

    4) Anyone who's spent a long time arguing about immigration online knows who the biggest screechers are.

    5) US msm is swarming with open borders Jewish pundits.

    So i'm going to guess KMac's research on this issue is likely to be correct.

    Replies: @grmbl, @The Undiscovered Jew, @Lot

    People should google KMac’s work on Jewish lobbying for open borders and judge for themselves.

    Which version of MacDonald’s work should we believe – the one where MacDonald says Jews, unlike other white ethnicities who lobbied for their own ethnic group, wanted open borders for every ethnicity before WWII.

    Or should we believe the other half of his work – his actual sources – which say Jews WERE lobbying ONLY to help their own Jewish co-ethnics up to WWII.

  251. @anon
    @grmbl

    You people are insane.

    I advise everyone to read MacDonald and make their own mind up.

    Replies: @The Undiscovered Jew

    He’s been caught multiple times lying about what his own sources say.

    I notice you don’t argue he quoted that study about religious authoritarianism correctly – and all I referred to was a word-for-word quote from the real study and MacDonald’s falsification of the results in MacDonald’s own words.

    If he will twist something like that out (and be foolish enough to think no one would catch him) his immigration history should be presumed to also be false.

    Unless you can give direct quotes from his sources to back up his interpretation.

    If he is honest than explain why the authoritarian survey results are the precise OPPOSITE of what he said they were?

  252. @Svigor

    But no, always the same old conspiracy theories get trotted out. The drive for world domination by a ruthless cabal.
     
    McDonald clearly gets under you guys' skin. Hence the absurd non-sequiturs about world domination, ruthless cabals, and conspiracy theories, while the only genuine criticism amounts to nitpicking, at best.

    “Steve’s description of her as a Zionist had the effect in my mind of highlighting her monumental hypocrisy (i.e., Jews get their own state”

    Nope, she wasn’t a hypocrite. Jews are an ethnicity. “Americans” are not and never have been an ethnic group. Why do Americans deserve their own country?
     
    With self-serving (and Jewish Supremacist) special pleading like this, who needs conspiracy theories?

    Meanwhile, some other audience is getting the "Israeli Jewry is multicultural and multi-ethnic" treatment. And another is getting the "Jewry is a religious, not ethnic, group" treatment. Et cetera.

    The answer to that question is self-evident to )))me((( and I would imagine most of Steve’s readers. Sorry it’s such a mystery to (((you))).
     
    Lol.

    People should google KMac’s work on Jewish lobbying for open borders and judge for themselves.
     
    Indeed. I don't bother defending MacDonald, he does just fine on his own. People who want to honestly assess need only be literate and curious.

    Your analogy is terrible.
     
    You're too stupid to assess the worth of analogies.

    Replies: @The Undiscovered Jew, @Bee

    Svigor, if I’m wrong then explain how this isn’t a lie – use that big brain of yours to come up with a plausible excuse for this one:

    http://web.archive.org/web/20090411051702/http://www.people.hbs.edu/dlieberman/lieberman.jewsRaceEmpire.pdf

    Kevin MacDonald:

    Altemeyer (1988, 2) defines “right-wing authoritarianism” as involving three central attributes: submission to legitimate authority; aggression toward individuals that is sanctioned by the authorities; adherence to social conventions. Clearly, individuals high on these traits would be ideal members of cohesive human group evolutionary strategies. Indeed, such attributes would define the ideal Jew in traditional societies: submissive to the kehilla authorities, strongly adherent to within – group social conventions such as the observance of Jewish religious law, and characterized by negative attitudes toward gentile society and culture seen as manifestations of an outgroup. Consistent with this formulation, high scorers on the Right-Wing Authoritarianism Scale (RWA) tend to be highly religious; they tend to be the most orthodox members of their denomination; they believe in group cohesiveness, group loyalty, and identify strongly with ingroups

    (Altemeyer 1994, 134; 1996, 84). Without question, traditional Jewish society and contemporary Jewish Orthodox and fundamentalist groups are highly authoritarian by any measure. Indeed, Rubenstein (1996) found that Orthodox Jews were higher on RWA than “traditional Jews,” and both of these groups were higher than secular Jews.59

    The real study:

    [A]re “very accepting” subjects equally authoritarian in all religions? Or do different denominations (as argued earlier) produce different levels of authoritarianism even among the strongly committed? If we examine just those subjects who answered the (0-5) “still accept” question with either a “4” or a “5” (that is, they indicated they “nearly completely” or “completely” accepted the religious beliefs taught them in childhood), who do you think were the most authoritarian of all these “true believers”? Fundamentalists (185.1) and Mennonites (185.3) among the students, Mennonites (202.1) and Fundamentalists (208.5) among the parents. The (rarer) United Church members, Anglicans, and Jews who were just as accepting of their religions scored about 25 points lower. True-believing Catholics and Lutherans lay somewhere in between. 61

    So not only are Jews among the least authoritarian of religious groups, according to Altemeyer highly religious Jews are among the least authoritarian of the highly religious.

    Yet in an awe-inspiring display of sheer gall (dare I say, ‘chutzpah’?), MacDonald takes information Altemeyer has collected from studies of subjects explicitly identified as “White North Americans” and applies it willy-nilly to the Jews whom Altemeyer, working from actual data rather than his own ‘suppositions,’ largely exempts from the discussion. The point is worth emphasizing: these highly ethnocentric, highly authoritarian, highly self-deceptive “people who are highly attracted to cohesive groups,” as MacDonald so guardedly puts it, whom MacDonald adduces as evidence for the self-deceptive tendencies of Jewish “hyper-collectivism,” were in fact members of MacDonald’s own ethnic group. I can think of no other way to describe this conduct than as an act of deliberate fraud.

  253. @anon
    @grmbl

    The msm is overflowing with Jewish pundits promoting open borders for everywhere except Israel.

    Replies: @The Undiscovered Jew

    That means nothing. Gentile pundits are also overwhelmingly open borders, both here and in Europe where the Jewish problem with dealt with only to have the Jews replaced with gentile liberals.

    For all of the bloviating about Jewish overrepresentation, it still only shows Jewish participation in ideas gentile liberals also supported and not that you’d be in any better shape if Jews had no political power.

    • Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax
    @The Undiscovered Jew


    That means nothing. Gentile pundits are also overwhelmingly open borders, both here and in Europe where the Jewish problem with dealt with only to have the Jews replaced with gentile liberals.
     
    What happens to any explicitly white, nationalistic or immigration restrictionist columnist/pundit? Is there even one writing for any major news outlet? The closest thing we have is Pat Buchanan. Where's he now? Anyone who cares about his career in the media knows what is acceptable opinion on these issues.

    Replies: @grmbl

  254. @The Undiscovered Jew
    @anon

    That means nothing. Gentile pundits are also overwhelmingly open borders, both here and in Europe where the Jewish problem with dealt with only to have the Jews replaced with gentile liberals.

    For all of the bloviating about Jewish overrepresentation, it still only shows Jewish participation in ideas gentile liberals also supported and not that you'd be in any better shape if Jews had no political power.

    Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax

    That means nothing. Gentile pundits are also overwhelmingly open borders, both here and in Europe where the Jewish problem with dealt with only to have the Jews replaced with gentile liberals.

    What happens to any explicitly white, nationalistic or immigration restrictionist columnist/pundit? Is there even one writing for any major news outlet? The closest thing we have is Pat Buchanan. Where’s he now? Anyone who cares about his career in the media knows what is acceptable opinion on these issues.

    • Replies: @grmbl
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    The immigration restrictionist columnist/pundit with the biggest foothold in the mainstream media in Germany happens to be Jewish: Henryk M. Broder in Germany (regularly has his -- hugely upvoted -- columns published in Die Welt paper and online editions -- Welt is the biggest-circulation broadsheet).

    In part this is because of the quality of his writing, but another factor is that his detractors don't find it as easy to paint him as a Nazi as they do non-Jewish critics of Islam (though they try anyway).

  255. “You can’t run effective background checks on people from countries that don’t keep reliable records”

    Those who are associated to terrorist associations or synpathizers are well known to intelligence agencies.

  256. “You’re too stupid to assess the worth of analogies.”

    You are a coward. This was in reply to my post, and yet you posted this in reply to “TheUndiscovered Jew” without tagging my name. What’s the matter, coward? Afraid of debating me and having me expose you for the idiot that you are?

    Let’s see: how is my explanation for why the analogy made by that guy was terrible incorrect? Go ahead. I dare you to engage me intellectually. We both know that I will destroy you.

  257. “You, sir, are speaking through an orifice which is not your mouth.”

    I think that I am speaking through that orifice of your mom. The article you posted is 100% irrelevant. All it means is that more competence is needed. My argument is sound.

  258. “You’re too stupid to assess the worth of analogies.”

    You are a coward. This was in reply to my post, and yet you posted this in reply to “TheUndiscovered Jew” without tagging my name. What’s the matter, coward? Afraid of debating me and having me expose you for the idiot that you are?

    Let’s see: how is my explanation for why the analogy made by that guy was terrible incorrect? Go ahead. I dare you to engage me intellectually. We both know that I will destroy you.

  259. Bee says:

    Um, despite all this “Jewish influence”, the U.S. is one of the more conservative countries out there (to have a majority caucasian population).

    As compared to Scandinavian countries, the U.K., Canada, etc., all countries that have relatively fewer (or sometimes no) Jews in prominent political positions… and yet all those countries have ended up so much more liberal than the more Jewish-influenced U.S.

    Canada and the U.K. are so comparatively liberal that the more Jews voted for the conservative parties in the last two elections than for the liberal ones (can you imagine a majority of U.S. Jews voting Republican?).

    And, by the way, though of course most U.S. Jews are liberal, we somehow have still ended up with conservative web sites named “Unz”, “Breitbart”, and “Drudge” (sorry, forgot the {{{}}}).

  260. Bee says:

    Oh, and of course, Kausfiles.

    Are there any conservative web sites named after Italians?

    Interestingly, most political show hosts of either stripe are Irish Catholic, in whole or part (O’Reilly, Hannity, Megan Kelly, and Lawrence O’Donnell, Chris Matthews, and Rachel Maddow). Even the late night show hosts are! (Colbert, Fallon, Conan O’Brien, Carson Daly, and more marginally Jimmy Kimmel).

    Of course, since this site is primarily interested in nailing the traditional enemies of white Christianity (Jews, blacks, Latinos, Muslims, etc.), it doesn’t really explore the political activities (or cultural missteps, if there are any) of white ethnic groups, so many may have missed this.

  261. Bee says:
    @Svigor

    But no, always the same old conspiracy theories get trotted out. The drive for world domination by a ruthless cabal.
     
    McDonald clearly gets under you guys' skin. Hence the absurd non-sequiturs about world domination, ruthless cabals, and conspiracy theories, while the only genuine criticism amounts to nitpicking, at best.

    “Steve’s description of her as a Zionist had the effect in my mind of highlighting her monumental hypocrisy (i.e., Jews get their own state”

    Nope, she wasn’t a hypocrite. Jews are an ethnicity. “Americans” are not and never have been an ethnic group. Why do Americans deserve their own country?
     
    With self-serving (and Jewish Supremacist) special pleading like this, who needs conspiracy theories?

    Meanwhile, some other audience is getting the "Israeli Jewry is multicultural and multi-ethnic" treatment. And another is getting the "Jewry is a religious, not ethnic, group" treatment. Et cetera.

    The answer to that question is self-evident to )))me((( and I would imagine most of Steve’s readers. Sorry it’s such a mystery to (((you))).
     
    Lol.

    People should google KMac’s work on Jewish lobbying for open borders and judge for themselves.
     
    Indeed. I don't bother defending MacDonald, he does just fine on his own. People who want to honestly assess need only be literate and curious.

    Your analogy is terrible.
     
    You're too stupid to assess the worth of analogies.

    Replies: @The Undiscovered Jew, @Bee

    “With self-serving (and Jewish Supremacist) special pleading like this”

    It’s “Jewish Supremacism” to say that Jews deserve their own country? Then is it Norwegian supremacism to say that Norwegians should have their own country, too? I’ve never thought of myself as a Norwegian supremacist, but I’ll take it.

    Sorry, but I still fail to see why old-stock WASP Americans deserve their own country, unencumbered by (in the context of Lazarus’ 19th century poem) Irish, Italian, Polish, and Jewish immigration. Did old-stock WASP Americans deserve their own country in the year 1500, too?

  262. Bee says:
    @fredyetagain aka superhonky
    @Bee

    "Why do Americans deserve their own country?"

    The answer to that question is self-evident to )))me((( and I would imagine most of Steve's readers. Sorry it's such a mystery to (((you))).

    Replies: @Bee

    The reason that “Why do Americans deserve their own country” isn’t self-evident to me is that I don’t know what the definition of “American” is in this context. You compared “Americans” to “Jews”, which made no sense.

    Fred Trump was born in Queens, to German parents. Was he an American? Mary MacLeod Trump moved to America at eighteen, married an American-born man, and was a naturalized citizen. Was she American?

    Is their son American?

    Was Emma Lazarus American?

  263. @The Undiscovered Jew
    @Svigor

    For the last time you twit, the religion of Judaism is not the same thing as the Ashkenazic ethnicity.

    Israel allows Kaifeng Jews, who are ethnic Chinese who supposedly practice Judaism, to immigrate.

    Israel's religiously discriminatory immigration policy, if applied to the US, would allow any Christian in the world to immigrate here. That means almost all of Latin America and at least half of Subsaharan Africa would be eligible for green cards.

    You still want to adopt Israel's immigration standards to ours?

    Replies: @Brutusale

    Do the Israelis force contraception on the Kaifeng like the did the Ethiopians they allowed to immigrate?

  264. @Malcolm X-Lax
    @The Undiscovered Jew


    That means nothing. Gentile pundits are also overwhelmingly open borders, both here and in Europe where the Jewish problem with dealt with only to have the Jews replaced with gentile liberals.
     
    What happens to any explicitly white, nationalistic or immigration restrictionist columnist/pundit? Is there even one writing for any major news outlet? The closest thing we have is Pat Buchanan. Where's he now? Anyone who cares about his career in the media knows what is acceptable opinion on these issues.

    Replies: @grmbl

    The immigration restrictionist columnist/pundit with the biggest foothold in the mainstream media in Germany happens to be Jewish: Henryk M. Broder in Germany (regularly has his — hugely upvoted — columns published in Die Welt paper and online editions — Welt is the biggest-circulation broadsheet).

    In part this is because of the quality of his writing, but another factor is that his detractors don’t find it as easy to paint him as a Nazi as they do non-Jewish critics of Islam (though they try anyway).

  265. @The Undiscovered Jew
    @grmbl

    Chrisnonymous

    I agree with everything you wrote except that analysis of the poem. Chrisnonymous makes a nice demonstration that the problem with antisemitism is overanalysis of Jewish actions to find hostile intentions. In his case he reads deep, cryptic meaning that doesn't exist into a straight forward poem about Jewish immigrants.

    Replies: @grmbl

    But the poem is always sold to us as championing immigration for any and all who want to come. Are you now agreeing with C.nymous that it was only ever about Jewish immigration? (What did Lazarus say about her intentions with the poem?)

  266. What happens to any explicitly white, nationalistic or immigration restrictionist columnist/pundit? Is there even one writing for any major news outlet? The closest thing we have is Pat Buchanan.

    Buchanan gets lots of airtime, surprisingly. Hannity enjoys interviewing him, he had his gig with Bob Novak on CNN’s Crossfire for years, he gets link-love from Drudge and Breitbart, and in the process he’s made enough of a profit over the years to afford to drive a BMW.

    Are you now agreeing with C.nymous that it was only ever about Jewish immigration? (What did Lazarus say about her intentions with the poem?)

    It was both Jewish immigration and other ethnic whites who migrated during the time. I’m sure she had Jewish refugees prominently in mind as she wrote but I think C-nonymous was over-interpreting the poem with cryptic meaning even in that respect.

    Are there any conservative web sites named after Italians?

    There a good number of prominent liberal Italian American women. Joy Behar, Pelosi, Janeanne Garafollo, and Madonna come to mind.

    I don’t know of an Italian website, however Arianna Huffington is Greek American and named her website after herself.

  267. @anon
    @The Undiscovered Jew

    People should google KMac's work on Jewish lobbying for open borders and judge for themselves.

    1) It made perfect sense for Jews to be pro open borders when they didn't have a homeland of their own - it's an act of hostile cultural warfare but borne of a unique situation maybe extenuates it.

    However now they do have a homeland, being pro open borders everywhere except Israel is cultural warfare with no extenuating circumstances.

    2) All the Jews I've ever known were actively open borders (except for Israel).

    3) I've known c. 6 Jews who moved to Japan and all of them are engaged in open borders activities over there also.

    4) Anyone who's spent a long time arguing about immigration online knows who the biggest screechers are.

    5) US msm is swarming with open borders Jewish pundits.

    So i'm going to guess KMac's research on this issue is likely to be correct.

    Replies: @grmbl, @The Undiscovered Jew, @Lot

    Yeah right you know 6 Jews who moved to Japan and all became open boarders advocates but don’t know ANY who are not “actively open boarders.”

    The first group could not be more than 1 in 100,000 Jews. But you claim to know six of them.

    The second group, anyone other than “actively open boarders” is like the vast majority of Jews. But you don’t know a single one, despite knowing 6 Jews who moved to Japan. I have a half Jewish family, went to a heavy-Jew college, and have Jewish friends, neighbors, co-workers etc. And I don’t know a single one who moved to Japan. But you know six of them.

    You are a filthy liar, and did does not surprise me you can’t even be bothered to use a pseudonym, as people would quickly ignore it.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS