Remember to enter Amazon via the VDARE.com link and we get a commission on any purchases you make—at no cost to you!
Obama Attorney General Eric (“My People”) Holder announced on Thursday that he going to end-run the Supreme
Former Florida governor, son and brother of former presidents, prospect
Welcome to another installment of No
[Peter Brimelow writes: “Stuff-Up” is British/ Australian English for “a bad mistake, or something that has been done very badly.” Diversity Is Strength! Also, Paul Gottfried’s new website is The Gottfried Report]
Jack Hunter a.k.a. The Southern Avenger bent the knee. He denounced his own career and his own beliefs, as reported by his own former editor. [Former editor of Rand Paul’s Neo-Confederate staffer talks about the Southern Avenger | Jack Hunter asked me to delete columns, By Chris Haire, Charleston City Paper, July 18, 2013] He prostrated himself before the gods of Political Correctness, he said all that our masters could have required of him, and he gave them everything they could have wanted.
In the end, it didn't matter.
He was purged anyway, forced out of the staff of Senator Rand Paul supposedly to return to the life of a political columnist. Of course, he's also retiring the persona of the “Southern Avenger,” raising the question of why anyone should read him at this point. After all, what does he have to say?
This kind of conservative self-emasculation is shameful, but it is merely the logical conclusion of what I have called “Goldbergism,” the terminal stage of conservatism, the official ideology of the Beltway Right, named after former NRO Editor Jonah Goldberg, in whose earlier career I took an appalled interest. “Goldbergism” represents the ideological acceptance of Leftist narratives on Civil Rights, feminism, homosexuality, and most importantly, immigration. At the same time, it tries to maintain the pretense of political opposition through trivial partisan cheerleading. The result is an ideology both dumb and doomed to fail. But, within the Beltway, it has won this round.
The dismal quality of Goldberg’s thought is fully evident in his recent column Rand Paul’s Big Fat Paleo Problem [New York Post, July 17, 2013], Here we are told the Kentucky senator, a much-Mentioned presidential candidate, has “hit some turbulence” because he allowed Hunter to work on his staff even though he once wore a “wrestling mask made from a Confederate flag,” uttered strong statements about states’ rights, and compared Lincoln to Hitler. Although Hunter had already proclaimed “I abhor racism” and said nice things about gay marriage and Obama last year, Goldberg views him as just the kind of rightwing kook
Although Speaker John Boehner just ludicrously refused to tell Face The Nation what he thinks about “immigration reform” a.k.a. the 2013 Amnesty/ Immigration Surge, it’s all too obvious what the House Republican leadership really wants: a sell-out. That’s why House Majority Leader Eric Cantor is holding hearings today (July 22) on his personal version of the DREAM Act—to be called the KIDS Act. (DREAM spells “Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors”, KIDS spells I-don’t-know-what at this point. But the “D” stands for “Donor.”)
If the GOP really was a GAP, rallying patriotic opposition to this nation-breaking legislation, it would be holding hearings that expose its weakness (see my suggestions below). Instead, it’s steering debate into a sob swamp—which might well result in a bill going to conference into which S.744 could be stuffed.
Ironically, the Washington Post story on the press conference announcing this showed John Boehner and Cantor posing behind a lectern with a banner that says GOP.GOV/JOBS. [House panel plans hearing on children of immigrants, By Ed O'Keefe, Washington Post, July 17, 2013. Actually that’s “illegal children of illegal aliens,” but, hey, this is the Washington Post].
But what Boehner and Canto are talking about a plan to give American jobs and subsidized college educations to millions of foreigners—at a time when 37 million Americans are struggling to pay off student loans and over half of recent college graduates are unemployed or underemployed.
"The First Black President ... Spoke First as a Black American," ran the banner headline of Sunday's Washington Post.
But why, when the fires of anger over the Zimmerman verdict were dying down, did he go into that pressroom and stir them up?
"A week of protests outside the White House, pressure building on him inside the White House, pushed him to that podium," said Tavis Smiley on "Meet the Press." Black leaders demanded Obama come out of hiding and stand in solidarity with the aggrieved and outraged.
Belatedly and meekly, Obama complied.
"Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago," said Obama.
But which Trayvon?
The one walking home with Skittles and tea? Or the one who sucker-punched Zimmerman, decked him, piled on, pummeled him martial arts style, hammered his head on the sidewalk, ignored his screams for help and got shot by the guy he was assaulting?
If he agrees Zimmerman got away with murder—"an atrocity," Al Sharpton said of the verdict—why did Obama hide behind this mush: "Once the jury's spoken, that's how the system works."
The president sent his "thoughts and prayers" to Trayvon's family.
To George Zimmerman, painted as a racist monster for 16 months, hiding in fear of his life, his Peruvian mother and family under threat—not a word
“Detroit Is A Microcosm Of Black America”–Black Studies Professor’s 2010 Op-Ed Says What Conservatism Inc. Won’t
- It’s not Heritage Foundation President Jim DeMint, who lamented that “50 years of liberal policies” had doomed Detroit [Morning Bell: Jim DeMint’s First Day As Heritage President, Heritage Foundation, April 4, 2013].
- Sorry, Dr. Tim Stanley (who wrote an interesting biography on Patrick J. Buchanan), but 51 years of voting for Democrats doesn’t quite explain the fall of the Paris of the West either [Detroit bankruptcy – this is what happens if you vote Democrat for 51 years, Daily Telegraph, July 20, 2013]
- Nor is it Kevin D. Williamson of National Review— not for the first time, he fails to mention the elephant in the room when purportedly describing Detroit’s decline [Detroit Goes Down: A lesson for American cities, July 19, 2013].
- Nor Dave Hodges, host of something called The Commonsense Show, who wields what Steve Sailer has called “Occam’s Butterknife” to obfuscate Detroit’s demise [Who Killed Detroit City and Why?, CommonSense Show, July 18, 2013]. (Funny, because the motto of Hodges’ show is: Freeing America, One Enslaved Mind at a Time. And nothing, nothing, emancipates us from the dogma of racial denial than contemplating the bankruptcy of Detroit in 2013).
That one man: Black studies professor Dr. R. L’Heureux Lewis [Twitter], who published Abandon Detroit, Abandon Black America back on June 2, 2010 at the now defunct black paper, the Atlanta Post. It lives on at the black website Madame Noire (and here’s the Archive.org link). It gave me the idea to write my own book Escape from Detroit: the Collapse of America’s Black Metropolis.
[VDARE.com note: Since publication of this piece, Lewis has changed his name to "R. L’Heureux Lewis-McCoy, also known as Dumi Eyidiyiye". Don’t ask us why. ]
Right in Lewis [whatever]’s first paragraph, any confusion about the origins of Detroit’s collapse is blowtorched away:
Detroit is a microcosm of Black America. I believe if you cannot love Detroit, you cannot fully love Black people. The Detroit Metropolitan area
'Justice for Trayvon' rallies draw thousands across USA was USA Today’s headline posted on Saturday afternoon:
Thousands gathered Saturday at rallies in more than 100 cities nationwide to remember Trayvon Martin, to press for federal civil rights charges against the man who shot him, and to attack stand-your-ground self-defense laws. (by John Bacon, July 20 2013)
The Leftist-Main Stream Media Complex took a little time to get going, maybe because they really believed their own propaganda and were stunned by George Zimmerman’s acquittal, but the Community-Organizer-In-Chief’s disingenuous speech Friday has spurred things along—just like his helpful reminder that Martin would have looked like a little Obama Jr. as last year’s hysteria was being orchestrated.
I watched the Martin/ Zimmerman trial carefully. And—unlike many VDARE.com readers and, let it be noted, all MSM Bigfoots—I have lived all my life surrounded by “diversity” in New York’s outer boroughs. My thoughts:
I. Blacks Don’t Mean What They Say
On Friday, the race-man-in-chief led another “dialogue” on his favorite subject: Whites are racists.
For generations, it’s always been the same “conversation”: blacks lecture, hector, and demand that whites agree that 2 + 2 = 5.
In 2008, after Barack Obama was exposed as an adherent of genocidal Black Liberation Theology, he notoriously threw his octogenarian white maternal grandmother under the bus by saying that she had “once confessed her fear of black men who passed her by on the street.” (Actually, she was just worried about a specific suspicious black man on her way to work.) [Transcript: Barack Obama's Speech on Race, NPR, March 18, 2008.]
In Friday’s monologue, Obama talked of, how prior to his political career, white women would see him approaching, and clutch their purses and lock their car doors; of his sponsorship as a state senator of an Illinois law prohibiting “racial profiling”; and of his desire to have all “Stand Your Ground” laws repealed, even though SYG was irrelevant to this case. [President Obama’s remarks on Trayvon Martin (full transcript), Washington Post, July 19, 2013.]
But blacks, even black nationalists like actor-director Mario Van Peebles who celebrate murderous black men, clutch their purses and lock their car doors at the sight of even harmless black men. Indeed, Obama himself has confessed to doing this.
And there’s a simple reason: A white who doesn’t take such precautions, as do prudent blacks, is a white who is going to be harmed or murdered. Every single day in America, blacks murder whites, often in horrific fashion.
Laws banning “racial profiling” have but one purpose:
Memo From Middle America | Lindsey Graham Wrong—Mexico Not A “Hellhole”, Doesn’t Need Northern “Safety Valve”
As long-time VDARE.COM readers know, I resided for a decade and a half in Mexico. A few years ago, I moved back to the United States. Since my wife is from Mexico, we go back at Christmas and in the summer. Of course, I can follow Mexico on the internet, but these visits allow me to get a real feel for the country.
The violence in Mexico? It’s certainly a consideration for us. Coincidentally, it was getting worse about the time we moved to the U.S. Now, when we visit, we’re more careful than we used to be. We take toll roads and try not to drive at night. On this trip, there was violence in the metropolitan area where we used to live and now visit, but we did not personally encounter it.
But that’s what Mexican violence is like. It’s not like some imagine, with the whole country a free fire zone 24/7. It’s just that, in certain regions of the country, violence might erupt and you could be in the crossfire. The odds are quite low, but woe unto those to whom it happens.
Nevertheless, life goes on in Mexico. People live their lives and go about their daily business.
My family and I had a good summer visit. We spent time with my wife’s family, we saw old friends and neighbors.
We visited a children’s home, where we delivered sheets and towels that my church in the U.S. had donated.
We ate in favorite restaurants and bought things that aren’t available where we live
Lilia and the boys and I went to see the new Superman movie in a Mexican movie theater.
We also took a trip within a trip, by bus, to the city and state of Aguascalientes. Besides being a tranquil city, Aguascalientes has been called “The Cleanest City in Latin America,” and it may well be.
While there, I was asked by some Mexican pro-life activists to sign a petition. I told them that though I agree with them, since I’m not a Mexican citizen I shouldn’t sign it so as not to get them in trouble. (Mexico has a total ban on foreign participation in politics.)
Also in Aguascalientes, we visited a hunting supply store which was actually licensed to sell ammunition. There’s only one legal gun shop in all of Mexico, but there are stores licensed to sell ammo, and there are hunters in the region. (People who already have guns, that is. Guns, if properly maintained, last for many, many years.) The store’s manager lightheartedly told me he’d formerly been an illegal alien in the U.S. We bought our two sons bows and arrows.
Our bus was stopped by agents of the INM, (Instituto Nacional de Migración), Mexico’s immigration bureaucracy. We were sitting right at the front, and the agent got on and asked me for my identification. Fortunately, we had brought my Mexican visitor’s permit. No problem. I wasn’t offended at all. Why should I be, if I’m there legally?
At night, we watched the Mexican news broadcast.
(But before that we watched a rather silly but entertaining telenovela La Tempestad. As usual, the main characters were white, including former Miss Universe Jimena Navarrete—in her first regular televised thespian performance, pictured below. See its website here and the other major characters here.)
The ongoing U.S. Amnesty/ Immigration Surge deliberations were
While the rest of the country was still up in arms over the George Zimmerman verdict, I watched a webinar from the Brookings Institution on The Future of the Republican Party: Is the GOP DOA? It wasn’t the most scintillating debate, but it did give some insight into how influential Republicans think—and what they don’t think about.
Zimmerman’s ordeal demonstrated once again the centrality of race and ethnicity in American political passions. But three of the four discussants—Elaine Kamarck, William A. Galston, and Alex Castellanos—played down the topic.
You might think that the violent, mindless rage directed by Democrats at Zimmerman as the face of white racism (despite his being Hispanic) might get Republicans thinking about how to exploit the inherent cracks in the Obama Coalition. But the idea seems never to have occurred to the participants.
The Brookings confab was mostly of interest because it offered a look the one speaker who did discuss race: at Sean Trende, the RealClearPolitics election data cruncher. Trende has a chance to evolve into the Nate Silver of the Right. He is a lucid speaker and a handsome fellow in a James Spader-sort of way, so he should get numerous opportunities to inject some reality checks into Republican thinking.
Trende’s recent four-part series on The Case of the Missing White Voters, Revisited basically introduced the Main Stream Media—at long last!—to the existence of the white voter. Trende is properly skeptical of the conventional wisdom, offered by such disinterested well-wishers of the GOP as Barack Obama, Charles Schumer, and Nancy Pelosi, that the House GOP must grant amnesty to illegal aliens now or never win another Presidential election.
In contrast, Trende noted that white turnout was weak in 2012. In particular, at the county level, total turnout tended to be limpest in counties where Ross Perot did best in 1992.
Perot, who turned in the strongest Third Party run since Teddy Roosevelt, ran strongest in regions somewhat distinct from the GOP’s current Southern and evangelical strongholds. The renegade billionaire appealed most to patriotic populists, the kind of more downscale white voters who were distinctly ungalvanized by Mitt Romney’s corporate executive style (Trende: “Romney got killed on ‘Who cares about people like me?’”) and by Paul Ryan’s budget wonkery.
As a thought experiment demonstrating “there are multiple ways to skin an electoral cat,” Trende pointed out three things the GOP could have done to get to fifty percent plus one of the popular vote in 2012:
- Win 21 percentage points more of Hispanics
- Win 16 points more of blacks
- Win 3 points more of whites
Which one seems easiest
In the aftermath of the acquittal of George Zimmerman, Eric Holder, Al Sharpton and Ben Jealous of the NAACP are calling on the black community to rise up in national protest.
Yet they know—and Barack Obama, whose silence speaks volumes, knows—nothing is going to happen.
"Stand-Your-Ground" laws in Florida and other states are not going to be repealed. George Zimmerman is not going to be prosecuted for a federal "hate crime" in the death of Trayvon Martin.
The result of all this ginned-up rage that has produced vandalism and violence is simply going to be an ever-deepening racial divide.
Consider the matter of crime and fear of crime.
From listening to cable channels and hearing Holder, Sharpton, Jealous and others, one would think the great threat to black children today emanates from white vigilantes and white cops.
Make the wrong move, son, and you may be dead is the implication.
But is this the reality in Black America?
When Holder delivered his 2009 "nation-of-cowards"
Yes, there's a war on women in America. But it's not the phony "war" that tampon-hurling feminists are always shrieking about—as they did last week in Texas to protest tougher regulations on dangerous late-term abortion clinics. No, I'm talking about a real war on women waged by Saudi royals and elites who've imported human trafficking and abuse of domestic workers onto U.S. soil.
Possibly the whole prosecution and trial was a media creation to which not enough ordinary citizens signed up. Possibly improvements in policing and (especially) surveillance discourage 1960s-style urban rioting. Possibly black Americans have, like the rest of us, lost their turbulence in the warm pacifying bath of welfareism and cheap mobile gadgetry.
Whatever the reason, we should give thanks.
Now that the fuss is dying down, the National Question mavens who check in to VDARE.com may want to take a break from present obsessions with race, class, and immigration. Let me therefore take you back on a brief historical trip to a simpler time.
Let us revisit the New York City draft riots, which occurred precisely 150 years ago this week.
What were the riots all about? The Civil War draft, obviously; but also, uh…race, class, and immigration.
The Confederacy, with a smaller pool of military-age men (about one million to the Union’s four), and facing the expiration of the one-year enlistments that had drawn in so many volunteers after Fort Sumter, passed the first conscription law—the first in North American history—in April 1862.
(There was much grumbling about it. Wasn’t the Confederacy supposed to be championing states’ rights and personal liberty against the heartless machine civilization of the North? The law also inspired a modest spike in desertions.)
The Union, with its greater resources, did not pass a conscription law until a year later. Like the Confederate law, Lincoln’s Enrollment Act of March 1863 allowed for “substitution”—a draftee could pay another man to take his place, thereby exempting himself for the entire term of service. There was also “commutation”—the paying of a $300 flat fee to exempt oneself from a single draft call. (There were four draft calls from 1863-65.)
This opened up a class divide. A New York laborer’s annual wage at the time was $600, so that substitution and commutation were beyond the reach of working men. The catch-phrase “a rich man’s war, a poor man’s fight” became current.
There was a race divide, too. The Enrollment Act applied to “able-bodied male citizens of the United States,” which was taken to mean whites only. New York City had a big black population—around 12,500 in 1860. The working classes already saw blacks as low-wage competition, and the city had strong mercantile connections to the South. The prospect of a flood of emancipated blacks further depressing wages, and a federal blockade of the South disrupting commerce, caused New Yorkers of all classes to have very mixed feelings about the war.
There was, indeed, sentiment in 1861 for New York to leave the Union a