Post-racial

“…[F]urther integration and/or assimilation into a white cultural and social structure…
will only allow me to remain on the periphery of society; never becoming a full participant.”
– President Barack Hussein Obama’s wife, Michelle Obama (nee LaVaughn Robinson), from her senior year thesis at Princeton, 1985

 

“It is this world…where white folks’ greed runs a world in need…”
– Reverend Jeremiah Wright, the Obamas’ pastor of twenty (20) years, from an unidentified church sermon

 

“No, no, no!  Not God bless America—God damn America!  …God damn America for treating its citizens as less than human!“

– Reverend Jeremiah Wright, the Obamas’ pastor of twenty (20) years, from an unidentified church sermon

 

“You’ve never seen a Columbine done by a black child. Never.
They always say, ‘We can’t believe it happened here.
We can’t believe it’s these suburban white kids.’
It’s only them*.”
– Obama-appointed Green Jobs “Czar” (aka “special advisor”) Anthony “Van” Jones, interview with Eyeblast.tv, December 2^nd, 2005

* I’ve never seen a corrupt black investor rig a billion-dollar Ponzi scheme either.  Must be that there are no blacks with such evil intentions, right?  Certainly it has nothing to do with there being no blacks with the deadly combination of ill intent and sufficient intellectual capacity to pull of something so grandiose, right?  Right?

 

“And the white polluters and the white environmentalists are essentially
steering poison into the people-of-color communities,
because they don’t have a racial justice frame.”
– Obama-appointed “Green Jobs Czar” “Van” Jones, uncredited interview, January, 2008

 

“For the first time in my adult lifetime, I’m really proud of my country.”

– Michelle Obama, campaigning for her husband in Wisconsin, February 18^th, 2008

 

“The point I was making was not that my grandmother harbors any racial animosity…
But she is a typical white person…”
– Barack Hussein Obama, interview on 610 WIP in Philadelphia, March 20^th, 2008

 

“I am concerned, as I’m sure many of you are, that these jobs not simply go to
high-skilled people who are already professionals or to white male construction workers.”
– Economic adviser to President Obama, in congressional testimony on the economic recovery and stimulus plan, January 7^th, 2009

“We ask you to help us work for that day when
black will not be asked to get back,
when brown can stick around,
when yellow will be mellow,
when the red man can get ahead, man,
and when white will embrace what is right.”
– Reverend Joseph Lowery, from President Barack Hussein Obama’s inaugural benediction, January 20^th, 2009

 

“I would hope that a wise Latina woman
with the richness of her experiences
would more often than not reach a better conclusion
than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”
– Obama-appointed Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, from her Judge Mario G. Olmos Memorial Lecture, 2001 (nominated May 2009; confirmed August 2009)

 

“Groups who have been targeted for violence as a result of the color of their skin,
their sexual orientation, that is what this statute [federal “hate crime” legislation]
tends — is designed to cover.”
– Obama-appointed Attorney General Eric Holder, in response to a question if whites or Christians would be protected by the Justice Department’s interpretation of the federal hate crime statute, Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, June 25^th, 2009

 

“Why, because I’m a black man in America?!”
– Long-time friend of Obama and Harvard Professor Henry Louis “Skip” Gates, to Cambridge police officers responding to a call about a possible break-in, when asked for ID, July 16^th, 2009

 

“I don’t know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that.
…[T]he Cambridge police acted stupidly…
…[T]here is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos
being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately*.”
– President Barack Hussein Obama, July 22^nd, 2009

* Do not
“African-Americans” and “Latinos”
commit a
wildly disproportionate amount of crimes?

 

“…to describe it in those terms I think does a great disservice to people who…risked all, for my people.”
– Obama-appointed Attorney General Eric Holder, House Appropriations subcommittee hearing, March 1^st, 2011

 

And now I’ll leave you with a post from Tim Wise, written after the Tea Party-delivered shellacking of the Democrats in the 2010 midterm elections (for a background of the “the most respected anti-racist writers & educators in the U.S.“, see

All the News That’s Fit to Print

You know, come to think of it, The
New York Times is perhaps the most honest newspaper in the MSM industry—at least insofar in that it states upfront that it’s going to be dishonest. It’s right there in front of you—you just have to read into their slogan a bit.

Who determines what news is “fit to print”? The editorial board at The New York Times. And who composes said editorial board? Leftists (what–you think there are any Ron Paul supporters on the board?). And what has been a common denominator of leftists over the past century? Spoon-feeding State-sanctioned (and State-contrived) “news” to the proletariat.

It’s not the fault of the Times for encapsulating the above in its pithy tagline—I mean, that’s the whole point of taglines—to be pithy! Really, it’s the fault of the intellectually torpid consumers of the Times for not putting on their critical-thinking caps and mustering the energy (and nerve) to peek behind the curtain.

But then, we already knew this of devoted Times readers.

Anyway, that’s really all beside the point.

So I pop open this morning’s USA Today and there’s a front page headline about pesticides being correlated with significantly lower IQs. The paper cites a study that saw as much as a seven point drop in average IQ’s across children raised in areas heavily exposed to pesticides compared to those who weren’t. It then goes on to compare this with lead poisoning, which had been associated with an average IQ impairment of two points. A two point drop in average IQ, says the article, “can have an enormous impact, says pediatrician Aaron Bernstein of Children’s Hospital Boston.”

It explains further…

“That’s because a population’s IQ scores, when plotted on a graph, tend to fall along a bell-shaped curve. Shifting the entire curve down, even if just by a few points, causes a big jump in the number of kids with low intelligence and a dramatic loss in the number of super-smart ones, says Bernstein, who wasn’t involved in the study. That can sharply increase the number of kids needing remedial education, says Bruce Lanphear, a professor at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, Canada, also not involved in the study.”

Of course the above is all true—the median of a Gaussian distribution of IQ scores is the A-#1 predictor of the success (or failure) of the population so measured. This has been known for quite a long time, has been repeatedly confirmed in study after study, and has yet to be refuted by any credible, competing, falsifiable theory.

Hey, you know what else is associated with lowered IQ? Oh wait—we’re not allowed to talk about that, are we? For if I were to suddenly start citing the mountains of evidence that show a distinct correlation between race and IQ, and that IQ is largely heritable (estimated at around 80% by the authorities on the subject, Hernstein & Murrary, if memory serves), and that IQ is essentially stable throughout one’s life—no matter how much money we throw at the DOE to erase that darned stubborn “achievement gap”—why, that will get me smeared as a “bigoted, hate-filled, redneck racist”, will destroy relationships, could cost me my job, and would probably even earn me threats upon my very life and limb.

Think I exaggerate here?

So, how is it that the MSM gets away with writing stories about IQ and normal distributions and how awful lowering those normal distributions by even two points is on society when talking about pesticide exposure, but has never, never, never, never, never brought up these facts when talking about immigration policy and the sundry “affirmative action”-type liberalist ridiculousness that have worked their ways into legal precedent, regulations, official policy, etc. (e.g., “disparate impact”, or “the achievement gap”)?

To anyone with their eyes open, the answer is obvious: “Environmentalism” (read: crypto-Communism and/or anti-humanism) is a cause near-and-dear to leftists (see the aforementioned “crypto-Communism”). Therefore, anything that might damn private industry and/or human development in general is heralded on the front pages of major newspapers—no matter how tenuous or preliminary be the studies. (The 800 lbs. gorilla of this very thing is, of course, the whole “OMFG GLOBAL COOLING! AN ICE AGE COMETH!!!”…oh wait, I mean “OMFG GLOBAL WARMING! PESTILENCE! FAMINE! WE’RE GOING TO BE BAKED ALIVE!”…oh wait, I mean, “OMFG THE CLIMATE CHANGES! IT CHANGES, MAN! THIS IS HORRIBLE! QUICK—GIVE ALL OF OUR MONEY TO DEVELOPING NATIONS!!! IT’S THE ONLY WAY TO STOP IT!!!“).

However, “race idealism” is the central dogma of modern liberalist thinking, and as such, anything at all that might be perceived as challenging this dogma is dutifully swept under the rug by the MSM. Hence we never hear anything about the fact that, say, allowing refugees and immigrants of untold numbers from sub-Saharan Africa—whose natives have an average IQ difference of twenty-five points relative to whites (and thirty points relative to East Asians), and Latin America—with an average IQ shortage of fifteen points relative to whites—should, by the very logic of the anti-pesticide crusaders stated in the USA Today article above, pose a catastrophic risk to American society.

Never hear about that, do you?

Oh, and just as an aside, anyone hear about the two innocent black folk on the MARTA in Atlanta the other day, on their way to work, and were savagely attacked by a wild mob of fifty or so white teens? What about the white twelve year-old who held up a convenience store outside of Detroit? Did you hear about the “flash mob” of whites in Venice Beach, CA, where things got violent and out-of-hand, leaving at least one person shot dead? How about the arrests and injuries that marred McDonald’s debuting of a grand hiring initiative targeted at unemployed white youth? What about the white stripper who knowingly falsely accused a bunch of innocent black college kids of raping her, leading to their being wrongly demonized by the media, while she went off and killed her boyfriend?

The cherry on top is that these sorts of things—of white youth going on violent, chaotic rampages that often target innocent black folk—have been happening essentially on a weekly basis for years. Did you know that?

No? You haven’t heard?

Of course you didn’t—because none of the above happened. But if it did happen, you’d hear about it non-stop. I’m sure it would even warrant President Obama to give one of his supposedly orgasm-inducing, nation-healing, war-ending, sea-parting speeches of unmatchable gravitas. And don’t even get me started on the raft of civil suits; the wailing of race hustlers like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton; the millions—or billions—paid out to the victimized blacks; the hate crime charges against the violent, racist whites; and the endless stream of anti-White legislation that would pour forth from DC, with the ridiculous career politicians esteeming themselves as an army of resurrected Churchills brought back to life to battle the second coming of MechaHitler.

But, of course, all of the above has happened with the races reversed. Black “youths” have become increasingly brazen in going on rampages attacking innocent, minding-their-own-business white folk who have the misfortune of having been reared in a society that tells them that rendering yourself defenseless is sophisticated and moral, being a victim is the only way to gain the attention of our fellow humans that our diversity-induced isolation has starved us of, and, as evil whites oppressors, we really had it coming anyway.

Beyond a white populace that has largely neutered itself and considers its own victimization and eradication to be the moral high ground in the never-ending quest for “social justice”, these out-of-control black “youths” also understand that they will never be held to account, precisely because they are black youths. There will be no race hustlers, there will be no gnashing of teeth by Eric “My People” Holder at the DoJ, and there will certainly be no “teaching moments” by our Affirmative-Action-Poster-Child-in-Chief.

And we can certainly expect the MSM to continue do what they do best: amplify that which fits their agenda; minimize or omit that which detracts from it.

Just like the good little propagandists they are.

Caped Crusaders – Government in a Nutshell

…Or, really, a cape.

So…(long, exasperated pause)…this is what happens when you get handed millions of dollars of strangers’ money and are told to go find somewhere spend it, lest you give lie to the ridiculous waste that is your department’s operating budget.

Ah, bureaucrats…is there any idea too dumb for them?

Apparently not.

ORLANDO, Fla.

Florida officials are investigating an unemployment agency that spent public money to give 6,000 superhero capes to the jobless.

Workforce Central Florida spent more than $14,000 on the red capes as part of its “Cape-A-Bility Challenge” public relations campaign. The campaign featured a cartoon character, “Dr. Evil Unemployment,” who needs to be vanquished.

{Snip}

How sad is it that in the collective mind of the ruling class, spending tax dollars on cartoon characters and capes for the jobless is a way to battle unemployment…as opposed to, say, cutting taxes so businesses can keep more of their money…which they can then reinvest in their businesses…thereby growing their businesses…thereby creating, you know, jobs.

Modern liberalism (for lack of a better term) is truly a mental disorder, and a horrible one at that. It binds the afflicted to a lifetime of perpetual infantilism, all the while convincing them that it is exactly their deplorable behavior, their severely stunted maturation, and their suckling at the teat (or lower!) of the ruling class that renders them morally and intellectually superior to their involuntary benefactors…benefactors who suffer a fusillade of insults and smears any time they have the temerity to suggest that these narcissistic leeches grow up, act like adults, and earn their keep.

Yet it is precisely these sad, afflicted, overgrown children who are running our country.

And rather poorly, I might add.

Maybe they just need better capes…

When Their Lips Are Moving

Vivian Schiller, CEO of NPR, announced her resignation this morning. Credible sources (read: not NPR—see here) say NPR’s board forced her out.

It was James O’Keefe—that young, college-age, wonderfully dorky wisp of a whitey-white white boy—who was responsible for yesterday’s earlier-than-planned resignation of NPR’s Vice President of Fund Raising, followed by today’s much-earlier-than-planned resignation of NPR’s CEO.

This is the same James O’Keefe who, along with his cute cohort Hanna Giles, single-handedly (well, with messaging help from the brilliant and brilliantly media savvy Andrew Breitbart) took down Acorn—a nation-wide “Community Organizing” apparatus (oh, the euphemisms!) that “just happened” to be one of the DNC’s—and Obama’s, in particular—largest, most powerful vote-garnering operations (legal or otherwise—it matter not!).

While on this topic of ignominious resignations, you may also recall some other uncannily similar incidents.

Remember a certain “Van” Jones (in quotes because, as you may also recall, that’s not his real name—he simply chose “Van” because, sounding like your typical teenager, he “thought it sounded cool”) who was appointed by the Obama administration to head up Obama’s “green jobs” racket (which is exactly what it is)? Remember how that “stupid, crazy, radical, extremist” Glenn Beck found some videos of “Van” Jones admitting to his adoption of Communist ideology; his pride in being arrested for partaking in a riot “in support of” cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal; his [typical] demonizing of “white folk” for “steering poison into the people-of-color communities”; and then, in the coup de grâce, uncovered “Van” Jones’ signature on a “truther” petition that implicated George W. Bush (and, of course, evil Zionists) for being behind the felling of the Twin Towers on 9/11?

Remember what happened to “Van” Jones? Yes—he was spirited away from his cushy White House job in the middle of the night over the Labor Day weekend—not coincidentally at the pit of the news cycle.

While we’re here, remember also when a certain surreptitiously recorded conference call between the NEA’s [former] Communications Director Yosi Sargent and a squad of local “artists” who were conspiring on how to leverage tax payer money, funneled through the NEA, to help propagandize Obamacare (which was, at that time—and continually to this day—viewed unfavorably by a majority of the population)—remember what happened when those tapes were released to the public?

I’m sure there are plenty of other incidents I could cite but, as they are not sitting readily at the top of my head, I’ll leave it at that as I feel the few examples above should suffice for demonstrative purposes.

So now let’s go back to the latest NPR imbroglio for a moment.

Recall that [now former!] CEO Vivian Schiller had very recently publicly testified that NPR (and PBS) are greatly reliant upon taxpayer subsidies—which was immediately directly contradicted by her chief fund-raising executive in [what he thought was] a private conversation.

Recall too that very same [Vivian] Schiller saying there was no liberal bias at her organization, and that, despite the fact that conservatives and liberals are nearly unanimous in their respective opposition to/support of public funding for NPR, any accusations of bias were merely “problems of perception.” Again, this was immediately contradicted by the same chief fund-raising executive in the same assumed private conversation where he flagrantly trashed anyone to the right of Lenin while coughing up the standard liberal conceits about their (liberals’) presumed monopoly on all possible intelligent, reasoned, informed, pragmatic, responsible, and oh-so-moral political, social, and economic positions.

And note what [Ron] Schiller said in his official apology after his termination: “…I made statements during the course of the meeting that are…not reflective of my own beliefs.” Perhaps you may wish to re-watch him enunciating those “statements.” Do you honestly believe they are not truly reflective of his “own beliefs”? Didn’t he even say that he was “taking off his NPR hat”—i.e., speaking of his own beliefs—prior to making some of his most damning of statements?

And lastly, if you were to read the Ed Morrissey’s HotAir write-up linked to above, you’ll see that there is a direct contradiction between what NPR news is stating as the reason for [Vivian] Schiller’s abrupt resignation this morning, and what “those in the know” are saying.

As Juan Williams—understandably agitated to near paroxysms over the staggering depths of the very liberal hypocrisy, cynicism, and arrogance of which he, himself, was a victim—said in a quote to “Fox Nation” (emphasis mine): “The rank hypocrisy of his remarks was telling for me. They will say things to your face about how there’s no liberal orthodoxy at NPR, how they play it straight, but now you see it for what it is. They prostitute themselves for money.”

Did you happen to note that in all these incidents, there are two key unifying factors: 1) The guilty parties are all liberals, and 2) all that it took to usher their hasty downfall was to expose to the public what they were saying behind the public’s back?

It’s not like an Eliot Spitzer or Bill Clinton or even John Edwards situation where you have some Lothario getting snagged engaging in licentious behavior. Moral failings—especially when it comes to male sexuality—are, if not necessarily forgivable, at least somewhat understandable.

What we see above is categorically different. What we are seeing (and hearing), time and time again, is that when liberals in some position of power mistakenly believe they are speaking to a closed audience of like-minded individuals, they have a completely contradictory message to what they say publicly.

One can’t help but wonder: What else are they saying, out of public view, that hasn’t been clandestinely caught on tape?

And, even more enraging: How much have they gotten away with in all the years prior to the rise of the internet, blogs, YouTube, and social media whereby everyday citizens could finally perform the job that the patently colluding MSM was supposed to be doing?

To compare, take, e.g., Scott Walker, who was “punked” (oy, the childishness) by some goon from Buffalo into thinking he [Walker] was speaking with Libertarian philanthropist David Koch. Walker’s conversation with “Koch”, which he believed to be private, was perfectly consistent with what he [Walker] was saying to the public.

Which reinforces what I’ve contended before: Your average conservative can be characterized as one who means what he says and says what he means, while your average [modern] liberal can be characterized as a cynical, Machiavellian, amoral, narcissistic elitist who will do and say anything and everything to maintain or strengthen his grip on money, power, and influence.

In a question: How do you know when liberals are lying?

Parody Becomes Impossible

Geeks (read: people very smart on the technical side of things, but who tend to be very dumb on the social side) often look to Star Trek as a template for how to engineer the future—i.e., what fictional technologies are really cool and therefore should be the focus of R&D.

And as William Shatner would attest, this has resulted in a lot of very cool, very good things.

On the other hand, liberals, as it has long been apparent, tend to model their social engineering on some absurdity that had been deployed in the service of parody. Take, for example, this story:

http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/metro/sex-toy-northwestern-university-human-sexuality-class-naked-woman-boyfriend-stage-orgasm-20110302

More than 100 Northwestern students watched as a naked woman was penetrated by a sex toy wielded by her boyfriend during an after-class session of the school’s popular “Human Sexuality” class.

Anyone familiar with classic Monty Python and who reads the above snippet will no doubt involuntarily recall this scene from The Meaning of Life:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTMlZSKEu-Y

These days, it must be really vexing for satirists to keep up with liberal’s accelerating free-fall down the abyss, let alone get ahead of the curve enough to actually get some egregious absurdity published as fiction before liberals have already established it as fact. (I once had a thought about writing a Swiftian piece about liberals genetically engineering human tissue to serve in haute cuisine restaurants—so that they could be “humane” cannibals while still being “edgy” in their delighted and smug shattering of one of the last few remaining taboos. Woe is me, for literally the next day I came across this report: Berlin ‘cannibal’ restaurant calls for diners to donate body parts for menu.)

This all brings to mind a good friend of mine’s high school senior quote: “On matters of fashion, go with the flow; on matters of principle, stand like a rock.”

In the liberal’s world view where all is relative and there are absolutely no absolutes, all is fashion; everything goes with the flow.

And, subsequently, parody becomes impossible…and principles are eroded to sand.

Killing the Undead

“Modern Liberalism” (“Neo-Liberalism”, “Cultural Marxism”, “Crypto-Socialism”, whatever) is like a zombie—a horrible monster that feeds on human brains and absolutely refuses to stay dead no matter how many times the good guys shoot it.

But make no mistake: Kill the beast we must.

Though there are many significant philosophical differences between “hard-core Libertarians” and “moderates” (for my purposes here, I include in this latter umbrella term a wide swath of political perspectives: various conservative classifications such as paleos and neocons, moderates of both political parties, and independents), there is nevertheless a bedrock of common ground that is of fundamental importance: We all look to respect the US Constitution due to (and in addition to) our shared desire to see to it that the Republic of the United States of America endures, ensuring that unalienable rights such as “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” (at minimum) are protected so as “to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.”

Contrast this with modern-day Liberals—a motley crew of globalists, socialists, communists, anarchists, anti-capitalists, anti-white racists, anti-Christian zealots, anti-Semites, Islamo-fascists, anti-American nutcases, anti-humanity/pro-Gaia militant hippies, not to mention the sundry drunks, womanizers, gangsters, thugs, scammers, murderers, rapists, pedophiles, etc.—whose widely and wildly divergent agendas nonetheless all converge around the singular goal of negating every tradition and institution that has been correlated with (and arguably causative of) the rise of American Exceptionalism and the attendant modern Golden Age known as Pax Americana. These include (but are not limited to):

• Demographics
  • A predominantly Christian people;
  • A predominantly white population; and
  • Integration and assimilation of immigrants—and flexible, pragmatic, and sane immigration policy that could be adjusted if certain immigrant groups prove problematic.
• Culture
  • A reverence for the founding fathers, their vision for the nation, and their crowning achievements: the Declaration of Independence and the foundational contract between Americans and their government, the US Constitution;
  • Respect for, practice of, and promulgation of “Judeo-Christian” values, such as regular worship of “The Almighty”, the nuclear family, homosexuality as sinful (or at least socially aberrant), humility, honesty, fidelity, charity, respect for the law, peace-making, defense of the vulnerable, etc.;
  • A military that was incorruptibly disciplined and upright, rightly revered, and whose traditions were sacrosanct and immune to the whims and fashions of the populace whom it protects and shields from the horrors they are uniquely trained to confront;
  • Social mores that stressed personal responsibility, patriotism, industriousness, ingenuity, education, positivity (“where never is heard…a discouraging word…”), rugged individualism, community (yes, in addition to “rugged individualism”), chivalry, etiquette, and egalitarianism—and stigmatized collectivism, slovenly, boorish, or outright criminal or treasonous behavior, reliance upon charity or social services for anything beyond temporary assistance in the event of some personal catastrophe or hardship, and a lifetime embrace of victimhood, excuse-making, and childish petulance and importunateness as a means of slithering out of one’s responsibilities and/or getting something one wants; and
  • Faith in the abilities of fellow American citizens—hard-working, intelligent, civil, honest, and fair—to self-govern, and skepticism and antagonism toward those who would deign themselves superior and uniquely fit to commandingly micromanage the lives of said citizens.
• Academia
  • Education emphasizing both the pragmatic (math, science, reading, writing, etc.) and the cultural pillars of Western Civilization (“the classics” of art & literature, the history of Western Civilization, etc.)—and regarded statist indoctrination as anathema; and
  • Instruction in civics, including basic knowledge of the system of American governance, an understanding of the Constitution, and general preparation of every student to become a “good citizen”, intimately knowledgeable and respectful of this, their “country of laws, not men.”
• News Media
  • A free press that strove for objectivity and endeavored to keep the state in check by serving as the public’s watchdog against political machinations—and certainly not to provide cover for such political machinations.
• Entertainment Media
  • Entertainment (including sports) that sought to entertain and/or ennoble, not to constantly drive a far-left political agenda and/or debase society by glorifying—and hugely remunerating—the absolute worst of human depravity.
• Government
  • A judiciary that would adjudicate, not legislate;
  • “Blind justice” meaning equality under the law—regardless of socioeconomic status, gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, or the like;
  • A political class who, by and large, genuinely sought to serve their constituents, their cities or states, and their country, without cynicism or greed—let alone contempt and hostility toward those they were elected to represent; and
  • A federal government whose powers were specifically enumerated and strictly constrained, with nearly all powers delegated to states, localities, and—above all—to the individual.
• Individual liberty
  • Free markets unfettered from onerous government interference and/or corrupt, political manipulation;
  • A decentralized economy guided by the “invisible hand” arising from the ingenuity, ambitions, and good faith of the individuals and their businesses that comprise said “free market”;
  • Freedom of speech and right to peaceable assembly, regardless of how unpopular that speech or assembly may be; and
  • Freedom to conduct one’s life as one chooses—to freely associate, to be able to defend one’s personal views without fear of losing one’s friends, livelihood, savings, or safety merely because those views are not popular, to eat as one wishes, to read what one chooses, to illuminate one’s home as one prefers, to use as many squares of toilet paper as one deems necessary—to make one’s own choices based upon one’s own unique, individual thinking and experiences and not be obligated to abide by the dictates of some far-removed, pompous, hypocritical, narcissistic, self-appointed, aristocratic vanguard issuing their untethered-from-reality, oft-destructive, do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do decrees from their palaces—palaces built and paid for by the very people they consider to be incorrigibly inferior to themselves.

The modern liberal—whether he realizes it or not—stands for and assists with the reversal of each facet of traditional American society bulleted above (and many more—it’s only a partial list).

As a result, Modern Liberalism, along with its political vector, the Democratic Party, has lost all legitimacy within the American body politic proper (“proper” meaning those who wish to see, not the destruction of, but the continuance of—and now, after 50 years of wildly destructive, Liberal Establishment hegemony, the revival of—the Republic). It’s as if we are entertaining enemies of the state as some sort of valid political alternative—treating traitors as simply some different but equally legitimate perspective on how best to run the business of America.

This is simply fallacious thinking.

Imagine Ward and June Cleaver grappling with some crisis that affected their household. Though Beaver and Wally may take different sides in the debate, it would be highly unlikely that things would get so ugly as to convince anyone that either side was actually rooting for and surreptitiously working toward the destruction and disintegration of the Cleaver household, no?

Now imagine Claudius, Gertrude, and Prince Hamlet. Despite Claudius’ affectations to the contrary, he is a dangerous, villainous man who rose to power through deceit and murder and who poses an existential threat to the legitimate—and noble—heir to the throne. Is Hamlet wrong for seeking Claudius’ destruction? Isn’t Hamlet’s cause just?

At the risk of putting things too simply, the “Leave it to Beaver” anecdote above is analogous to the Libertarian/Moderate split: Both are united in their desire to “fix the family”, but divided on how best to get there. On the other hand, “Hamlet” here is analogous to the (Moderate + Libertarian)/Modern Liberal split. Like Claudius, Modern Liberalism ascended to its position of power—and seeks to maintain that position of power—through deceit, bribery, extortion, racketeering, intimidation, and worse. It’s only just that this Machiavellian, power-hungry ideology is disposed of, its sycophants ridiculed into shamed silence, and its tyrants given the boot from all halls of power—whether that be from government offices, ivory towers, news organizations, or the like.

But being that this bad penny of an ideology is as stubborn and as it is crafty, like a zombie, it can’t be taken out with a few quick and easy shots. It must be obliterated, completely, and then safeguards must be put in place to make sure this zombie menace does not rise again.

There are so many fronts on which to fight this beast that it may seem overwhelming. But certainly even the least amongst us can assist the effort by removing their political blinders, acknowledging the situation for what it is, and not being afraid to “speak truth to power” as “they” love to say—no matter how many insults they hurl at you (stupid, racist, etc.).

The fight is on, the time is now, and there’s absolutely no upside to pussing out.

American Lives

Yesterday, four innocent Americans were killed by Somali pirates.

You may recall a similar story from not too long ago involving the Russians. “Similar”, of course, only by virtue of the fact that Somali pirates took a Russian ship; the rest of the story, however, is quite different: In response, Russian commandos stormed their commandeered ship in the dead of night, liberated their countrymen (and their ship), arrested the pirates, handcuffed them to their (the pirates’) boat’s rigging—now here’s where it gets really good—lit the boat on fire with the pirates chained to it…filmed it…and posted it on YouTube for all the world to see.

All the world, mind you, including Somali pirates.

Now, guess what some non-Russian ships from small countries—countries without the supposed clout and superior military force of the United States—do when sailing through the pirate-infested waters of the Gulf of Aden? They hoist Russian flags, knowing that the Somali pirates, wild simians though they be, at least can do some basic visual pattern matching and recognize that that flag indicates the ship is not to be messed with.

One may wonder: How does the “world’s only super power”, with the most technologically-advanced military on the planet, allow its citizens to be killed by a motley band of missing links on barely-seaworthy rafts? Not only that, it’s not like this came out of the blue: These animals have been terrorizing these waters for decades, with a marked increase in these types of incidences over the past few years.

One may also wonder: Why does President Obama, who seems to be highly concerned about shoving a wealth-redistributive healthcare scheme down the throats of protesting majorities, suing his own states for daring to enforce immigration law, or using his massive and massively-financed political machine to topple a duly-elected governor’s attempt to execute the very things he was voted into office to execute—why does this president seem so inept in dealing with these international situations in which Americans are being killed by the world’s most ruthless and brutal thugs?

Any chance it could be his complete and utter lack of real-world experience?

Here’s a hypothetical question: What if those four murdered Americans were…

• Obama’s inaugural benedictory speaker, Reverend Joseph “We ask you to help us work for that day when…when white will embrace what is right” Lowery,
• Obama-appointed [, former] “Green Jobs Czar” Van “Bush was behind 9/11” “That’s When I Became A Communist” Jones,
• Obama’s good friend (and poor, oppressed victim of presumably racist, stupidly-acting Cambridge police officers), Louis “Skip” “Why, because I’m a black man in America?” Gates, and
• Obama’s “pastor” of 20-some years, Reverend Jeremiah “No, no, no! Not God bless America, God damn America!” “U.S. of KKK A.” “[9/11 = ] America’s chickens are coming home to roost” “We started the AIDS virus” Wright

…instead of four folksy, white Christians (who perhaps are undistinguishable to President Obama because they’re, you know, typical white people)—might Obama have been a bit more impassioned about their defense?

(But to question President Obama’s racial biases is, of course, being racist, so I should stop that line of questioning before the thought police come down on me and I lose my job, my friends, my family, and get permanently blackballed from ever participating in “civil society” again.)

Now consider: Of those pirates who brutally murdered those four good, innocent Americans, 13 or 14 (I’ve read some conflicting numbers) will be brought to trial in the US and likely be holed up in a US prison for the rest of their lives.

Please take a moment to consider this: The pirates, who hail from one of the most impoverished, dysfunctional “nations” in the world, are going to be brought to America, put up in comparatively comfortable quarters, fed three squares a day (something they’re certainly not getting on a regular basis at home), given cable TV, books, full workout facilities, healthcare—healthcare—forget “better healthcare”—they now get healthcare whereas in Somalia they have nothing!…lawyers, Imams, Korans, prayer mats, etc…and—hold yourself—all paid for by the American taxpayer.

To pour some additional salt into the wound, keep in mind that when we say “American taxpayer”, we mean almost exclusively productive people who get up every day and go to work and earn a living—which the state and federal governments then strip to pay for, amongst other things, housing lawless, international murderers of innocent American citizens. (Yes, there are also sales taxes and the like that everyone, technically, pays—but factor in what is given back by the state and federal governments to the poorest amongst us, and their net tax contributions are effectively zero—if not more often negative.)

And who are these poorest amongst us? Well, for starters, there are the Somali refugees graciously taken in by “forward-thinking”, “compassionate” Minnesotan liberals. Guess how that’s working out for everyone?

Look, people—for any of you benighted fools out there still gullibly swallowing the Liberal Establishment bullsh-t: Gladly taking in and supporting people who steal your stuff, burn down your house, rape your mothers, beat your fathers, kill your children, and destroy your once-friendly and safe neighborhood because they are functional retards who have no appreciation for all the good things you’ve given them and only hate you all the more for doing so is not “forward-thinking” or “compassionate“—it’s stupid, cowardly, masochistic, and suicidal—not to mention fatally unfair to those who are exposed to these pariahs courtesy of your best-of-intentions.

There is no other way to describe it if one wishes to be forthright.

With that in mind, take a look at the situation in Libya. Remember back in the 80’s when Qaddafi was essentially the proto-Bin Laden, funding and orchestrating terrorist attacks against innocent Americans, Europeans, and Israelis the world over? Remember what made him stop? Give yourself a prize if you answered “President Reagan sent in a squadron of fighter jets and bombed the f*** out of the homes of Qaddafi’s family and paramilitary.” Remember how Qaddafi played nice after that (barring much later reports that he and/or his military were involved in the Lockerbie bombing)?

Next question on the subject: Do you remember when Qaddafi started playing really nice? When he not only ceased killing innocent people for the hell of it, but actually started cooperating with the US—e.g., handing over Muslims extremists, helping to “smoke out” Al Qaeda, etc.? Remember about when that started? Yup—on the heels of the world watching a ragged, filthy Saddam Hussein get pulled out of a “spider hole” by American military and then get his neck stretched courtesy of his fellow Muslim brothers.

And what happened once Obama—the Great American Apologist who would, we were promised by everyone in the Liberal Establishment, turn the tide of world opinion back in favor of the United States after eight years of the “disastrous” “Bush Doctrine” (you know the one—the guiding philosophy that by forcibly converting Iraq into a functioning Democracy, it would create a domino effect whereby the hoi polloi of neighboring nations would realize they didn’t have to live under the thumbs of ruthless dictators, and so would rise up against them—you remember that crazy doctrine that would never, ever, ever work we were repeatedly told, right?)—took the reins of the US? Remember what happened in 2009, within a year of Obama’s inauguration?

Here’s a reminder: That “Lockerbie Bomber” was released back to Libya per Qaddafi’s sudden threats against British Petroleum, who in turn pressured the UK government to provide some assistance.

And when a peaceful (turned violent, and now quickly escalating into an all-out civil war) movement started in Libya this past week to oust Qaddafi and his brutal regime, Qaddafi did what again? That’s right: He unleashed the full force of his military to kill his own countrymen and vowed to defy any and all international pressure to step aside. Remember that? I mean, it’s still happening, so it shouldn’t strain the memory too much.

Imagine: An evil, brutal dictator played nice when America used (or threatened to use) overwhelming force against him, and immediately returned to his evil ways once that charming, “post-racial”, wildly inexperienced, far-left liberal got voted into the White House and gave the warm-and-fuzzy, über-sophisticated, so-not-cowboyish promise to “extend a hand if you’d only unclench your fist.”

And guess what: As Libya descends into violent anarchy (in a Muslim nation—go figure!) and civil war, there are some estimated 5,000 Americans living—and now presumed trapped—within the country.

And what’s been the Obama administration’s efforts to bring them to safety?

Granted, we don’t, can’t, and shouldn’t know the details of those efforts at this time (outside of apparent efforts to ferry them out as I write this)—but can’t one be forgiven for thinking that the ostensible deer-in-headlights pussy-footing that we’re seeing this completely inexperienced administration doing once again as yet another Mid East nation goes up in flames is not some poker face routine but is, on the contrary, exactly as it appears to be: i.e., a far-left administration so focused on “community organizing” the whole of the American people into a macrocosm of hopelessly dysfunctional leftist Chicago (side note: yeah Rahm!) that they once again are caught without a plan, coherent strategy, or desire to deal with the international problems at hand? (Which is, of course, one of the federal government’s very few principle duties.)

And what does this portend for all of those Americans holed up inside an exploding and imploding—and, of course, America-demagoguing—Libya? Will Obama be willing to stop butting into the wholly and solely state politics of Wisconsin (and Indiana and Ohio…) and focus on readying every tool in his arsenal—including overwhelming military force—to bring our fellow Americans home to safety?

Or will those thousands of American citizens in Libya end up like those four innocent white folk recently kidnapped by a gaggle of simians on a dinghy, made so vulnerable and ultimately killed because our Liberal Establishment would rather sacrifice its own citizens than bear the condescension of snotty, adolescent Europeans who’d invariably charge we aren’t sufficiently concerned about the “human dignity” of ruthless barbarians?

All of the above (this blog ain’t called “Logorrheatorium” for nothing, btw) boils down to a simple, commonsensical point: There are evil people in the world, capable of unimaginably horrendous acts, and who will not be swayed by anything except brute f***ing force. And if you really care about humanity—really care, and don’t just pay hip lip service to that notion—then you’d recognize that in the interest of humanity, you’ll have to crack a few [bad] eggs once and awhile.

(Unfortunately, the Liberal Establishment has been hard at work for the past half century caking the eyes of the citizens of the Western World with pie-in-the-sky fantasies about world harmony and Kumbaya while simultaneously erasing the history of the nation that has served as one of the greatest forces for good in the whole of human civilization. As a result, common sense, as they say, ain’t so common any more.)

So the question is not “When did we become this pitiful nation of dim-witted, importunate, ball-less, sniveling Neville Chamberlains?” (obvious answer: the “60’s”), but rather: Will our younger generations do the growing up—and the growing of a pair—that their parents never did? Will they recognize that the real world does not abide by the dictates of Liberal fantasies, but rather uses these fantasies as a means to exploit the naïve, weak, and credulous? And will they be able to muster the honesty, courage, and diligence necessary to restore this nation as a safe and secure haven for the good people of the world, where they can live their lives in freedom, peace, prosperity, and progress?

In short, will American youth resume the mantle that has been dutifully carried by generations of sober-minded and adult Americans (these qualifiers, of course, except the Boomers and X’ers from this noble legacy), or will they adopt the depraved self-indulgence and suicidal insanity of their parents’ generation and watch this grand experiment in human excellence crumble into the pit of debilitating uncertainty, violent chaos, and relentless despair that typifies much of the rest of the world?

While the Obama administration ambivalently (and impotently) sputters as American lives hang in the balance, and though we may not be able to do much for our fellow Americans currently held hostage by the world’s miscreants (both at home and abroad), we can at least try to rescue our future—i.e., our youth—to wake them up from the Liberal Establishment’s induced dogmatic slumber, help them learn to recognize and accept reality for what it is, provide them the spiritual guidance necessary to differentiate right from wrong, and give them the education and resources that will enable them to stand up to and defend themselves and their loved ones against evil men and their sadistic machinations.

Though that task may seem daunting, it is certainly achievable.

And never forget that, as the pitch goes, we got to be in it to win it. If we don’t fight, we can’t win.

Prestidigitation

More important to the magician’s tools than smoke and mirrors is the simple sleight of hand created by getting people to focus on some red herring while the magician stealthily work just outside the bounds of his audience’s perception.

This is all well and good in the world of “magic” as we are willing participants in the deception—the whole deceptive act is, in fact, a form of great entertainment for many.

But when this deception occurs where it ought not occur—say, in the form of state-sponsored media—we would do well to remain skeptical and look for any possible sleight of hand…and not be so easily distracted and so credulous as to take the man-on-the-stage’s claims at face value.

PBS and NPR often claim they are objective, non-partisan purveyors of news and entertainment. Their defenders may even cite the occasional studies showing that their news programming provides relatively equal times for politicians on “both sides of the aisle”. And they claim that very little of their funding comes from taxpayers (implying, of course, that even if there were a liberal bias across their organizations, it wasn’t like it was costing conservatives too much in the grand scheme of things…so just pipe down you ignorant conservatives!).

To the intellectually torpid and hopelessly partisan, such professions—and purely superficial analytical “evidence”—of integrity and objectivity will suffice. But for the rest of us, this simply will not do.

Instead, let’s look for what’s really going on beneath the words. Let’s look where the real action lies. Let’s, to borrow a phrase, “follow the money.”

A few days ago, House Republicans unveiled a set of decently-sized budget cuts in an effort to demonstrate some horribly-lacking leadership on the dire fiscal crisis the country now finds itself in after six years of Democratic control of Congress (not to mention a half century of Liberal Establishment hegemony). One of those cuts was the defunding of NPR and PBS. That is, the government would no longer subsidize these organizations through their myriad financing channels (Corporation for Public Broadcasting, National Endowment for the Arts, Department of Education, etc.), and thus these entities would have to sink or float based upon their merits (or lack thereof)…just like any other private business in America.

Now, given NPR’s brass’s constant pooh-poohing of any talk of defunding as a “useless” exercise (since they only receive some purported 2% of their funding from taxpayers, and thus defunding serves no material federal budgetary benefit), you would think that the Republican proposal would be a winning proposition for NPR and PBS because a) losing only 2% of their revenue would be an easy loss to absorb, and b) it would exonerate NPR/PBS of the constant conservative charge of being a liberal “state-run media” outfit, thus allowing them to stay largely outside of the political fray given that they are, according to their own claims, “objective, impartial, and non-partisan”.

Of course, this was not NPR’s reaction to the cuts. In fact, a couple of the cartoon characters from their children’s programming will be accompanying some Democratic congressmen to Capitol Hill today to voice their opposition. (See, e.g., here.)

So, if NPR is worried about losing a purported 2% of their funding that is, by their repeated invocations, “negligible”, I take this to mean that they pull in much more than 2% from taxpayers. How could this be? Wouldn’t someone have called them out on this “2%” number since it started getting bandied about on the heels of the deplorable Juan Williams fiasco?

Well, that’s not such an easy one to answer. Apparently the sources of NPR’s funds are incredibly murky…at best. (See, e.g., here.) Side note: How’s that for “transparency”?

Next, you’ll notice that it was Republicans who proposed axing NPR’s funding, with conservatives—justifiably frustrated for being forced to fund a media outlet that, to their eyes, is but one more means by which to ridicule and marginalize them—cheering it on.

You’ll also notice that it is solely
Democratic congressmen who are pulling in the PBS heartstring-tuggers (i.e., cartoon characters…seriously…the ever-infantile mentality of the left) to protest the funding cuts.

So, if Republicans are unanimous that PBS/NPR funding—regardless of how large or small—is an unnecessary federal expenditure and thus should be eliminated as part of some much-needed and long-overdue fiscal discipline, and it is only Democrats who are insisting that the funding is crucial…might that make one a bit suspicious that there may be some substance to the claims of liberal bias pervasive throughout this news and “children’s programming” (don’t let the double entrende escape ya!) media conglomerate?

No? Still dubious?

Ok, what if I told you that the most far-left President in the history of the United States of America has not only refused to consider cutting funding, but actually just proposed his own budget in which he increased funding for NPR/PBS?

And then what about if NPR issued a public “thank you” to said far-left President for this proposed increase?

Still unsure?

Ok, what about MoveOn.org—the nation’s liberals’ “grass-roots” operation that is owned and operated by about the most radically-left leftists—creating a petition to “save NPR” from evil Republican defunding efforts?

Quote (emphasis mine):

“Congress must save NPR and PBS once and for all. Congress should guarantee permanent funding and independence from partisan meddling.”

(The crass Orwellian doublespeak and Statist-media-control messaging in MoveOn’s statement above is a clear indicator of both the desperation of the left, and why they are rightly despised with such passion by anyone with a brain and a conscience.)

What then? What should one conclude when nearly every facet of the hardcore liberal establishment comes out in defense of an opaquely taxpayer-funded news and “children’s programming” media conglom when faced with unanimous conservative desire to remove its public funding?

Is this not seeing the sleight of hand for what it is? Is this not telling of a left-leaning bias—however well concealed, however well removed from public perception—throughout our venerated NPR and PBS programming?

 

The common wisdom is that you know who your true friends are when the chips are down. Well, for NPR at least, the chips are down; their public funding is on the chopping block. And the only people to come to NPR’s defense are—wholly and solely—leftists.

And you don’t gain leftists’ loyalty by maintaining a strict discipline of political impartiality, do you? No, quite the opposite, in fact.

And so, wouldn’t you agree, that there is perhaps something up the sleeve of those fighting for NPR’s funding that we should be paying more attention to?

I certainly do.

And now I must conclude with this obligatory Jefferson quote:

“To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.”
– Thomas Jefferson

The Fourth Plantation

Post-60’s journalism “journalism” in a nutshell: http://www.youtube.com/user/Battlefield315#p/u/2/zF3hbPtCttc

W: I can filter out all the inaccurate stuff.
M: How?
W: I can use my liberal world-view as a guide. If anything contradicts it, I know it either didn’t really happen, or wasn’t worth reporting.
…
M: I see a Pulitzer Prize in your future!

Hear about the white politicians in Charlotte, North Carolina who conspired with all—all—of the local hotels and conference centers to prevent the NAACP from gathering and holding a meeting with its supporters anywhere within the city limits? No? Well, that’s because it never happened.

Of course, if it did happen, we’d all hear about it non-stop for months, and we’d have legislation pouring out of Washington to try to prevent any possible future evil, racist, white fascists from trying to suppress anyone’s Constitutionally-guaranteed freedom of speech ever again. And protests—violent, demagoguing protests by the Liberal Establishment’s ridiculous brownshirts. And imagine the lawsuits! Oh, the lawsuits and sums of damages that Revrum Al, Jesse Jackson, and their merry band of scumbag lawyers could drum up! Lawd, al’mighty!

Now, take the same exact situation, but reverse the races. Oh, and, instead of being a hypothetical situation, this one’s real.

Oh, and one more detail: This is the second year in a row that this has happened (last year by threats of violence, this year courtesy the collusion of local government and business leaders).

How much attention has the media given this real news story of the suppression of the Constitutionally-guaranteed rights to peaceable assembly and speech of intelligent, kind, civilized, patriotic Americans? Well, I’m confident that faithful consumers of Soviet-era Pravda the MSM will never have heard of it.

From Alexander Hart over at VDare:

“Local news station WSOC-TV said that Cannon “feared violent opposition to the group’s presence in the Queen City” and quoted him as saying,“We’ve always been about trying to be as inclusive as we possibly can be, and I will tell you when you have extreme groups on any side coming, it should raise a red flag.” [White Nationalist Group Banned From Charlotte Hotel, WSOC-TV, January 27, 2011]

This seems to be an acknowledgement that he is not really worried about violence coming from American Renaissance attendees—given their track record, he had no reason to—but by violent left-wing protesters. 

This raises the question: why doesn’t he use his “bully pulpit”, as an as an African American Democrat, to tell these left wing “anti-racist” activists to respect other’s rights?

Of course these commonsense questions are never asked by the Main Stream Media.  In fact, outside of the local Charlotte media and publications like VDARE.com and AlternativeRight, absolutely no one is even mentioning the cancellation of the conference.”

Of course not. The MSM, like any propagandist organ serving at the pleasure of a totalitarian ruling class, employs deception less through outright lies (as it’s tough to save face when caught passing off pure fiction as solid fact; see, e.g., Dan Rather) than they do via amplifying news that fits their agenda, and minimizing—or outright omitting—news that contradicts it or might otherwise give the unwashed masses “dangerous” ideas.

But let’s be clear: This lack of reporting of the egregious oppression of American Renaissance’s rights is not just an example of MSM bias by omission. We also have plenty of examples of outright lies/misinformation. Do a search in Google News on “Jared Taylor” and at least half the headlines come up describing AR as “White Supremacist” or “Anti-Semitic” (e.g., here). Spend just a few minutes on Taylor’s American Renaissance
site and you’ll find no claims of white supremacy in any regard (Taylor himself claims to be a “yellow-supremacist”, repeatedly citing Asians’ perpetual topping of all measures of intellectual achievement), and certainly nothing that could possibly be described as “anti-Semitic” (there are many active Jewish contributors and participants at American Renaissance, Taylor does not differentiate between “white” and “Jewish”, and he is actually hated by neo-Nazi types for this perceived “philo-Semitism”). Beyond this, there is nary a sign of racist language proper—no vulgarity, no slurs, no cruel or unnecessary maligning of any individual or group. What Taylor and his fellow contributors at American Renaissance provide are simply 1) links to [typically local] news stories that “somehow” never find their way onto the national networks or major newspapers, and 2) links to an array of books, articles, and other reference materials that are civil, scholarly, intelligent, empirically-based studies that contradict the Liberal Establishment’s many preposterous and outright deceitful dogmas.

And lastly, this [non-] story serves as a case in point of the MSM’s third method of “information management”: unabashedly insulting and smearing those who present an alternative perspective to the Liberal Orthodoxy. The examples abound, but perhaps none quite capture it so neatly and concisely as this piece by the Charlotte Observer: Free speech covers all, even the primitive.

Don’t believe me? Think I’m running interference for Taylor and American Renaissance, trying to put a happy face on anachronistic racists who threaten all the supposed racial progress we’ve made since Leftists infested every hall of power in American politics and culture? Well, fine—don’t believe me. But while you’re at it, be fair about it and don’t believe the MSM’s version either. Instead, go do your own fact-checking. Like conservatives in general (unlike leftists almost universally), Taylor says what he means and means what he says, and his work is out there for all to see, fully exposed, without any deceit or trickery: www.amren.com. Go there. Go find evidential support for the MSM’s lazy, libelous characterization of “White Supremacism”, of “Anti-Semitism”, of “Racism”, of “Hate”, of “Ignorance”, of “Xenophobia”, of “Primitiveness”, or any other such ad hominem smear.

Next, go read up a bit about Jared Taylor; check out his debates with the likes of anti-White racist “anti-racism speaker” Tim Wise; learn a bit about his history, his perspectives, his attitudes.

Now, if you’ve done your homework over at AmRen.com and perhaps a bit on Jared Taylor, reexamine the MSM’s characterization of American Renaissance and/or Jared Taylor (when it bothers to mention either one at all). So…how well does that characterization jibe with what you found during your own research?

All hail our liberal stewards of objective journalism!

It is a fact—as much a fact that the earth revolves around the sun and the moon is not made of cheese—that the MSM has a far-left agenda, and that they drive this agenda with all the devious perfidy of any of the [staggeringly violent] Statist regimes of the past century who sought their rise to—and maintenance of—power via carefully controlling what the people know, what they don’t, and what stays at the forefront of their political thinking (via repetition and emphasis of the establishment’s formulated talking points).

Anyone with their eyes open and a shred of intellectual honesty understands and admits as much. The trouble is the good and honest people out there who have not ventured off the information monopoly of the Fourth Estate Plantation and into the blogosphere where red-blooded Americans—and freedom lovers the planet over—are hacking away, desperately, at the foundation of the Liberal Establishment before it snuffs out yet one more great civilization.

(And, what’s more, this is not just one more great civilization. Like the title of Bill Bennett’s book, America truly is the world’s last, best hope.)

Hear about that shooting in Tucson of US Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords? What has been the MSM narrative that, despite ever-mounting evidence against that very narrative, started the moment the bodies fell and continues—though largely abated—to this day? Give yourself a prize if you answered that “radical, right-wing” rhetoric of radical, racist, “overwhelmingly white”, ignorant, violent, bible-thumping, trigger-happy, redneck Tea Partiers—along with Sarah Palin’s cross hairs over Gifford’s district (but not, of course, the DNC’s maps with targets and bulls’ eyes)—were to blame for creating a toxic, vitriolic, violent “climate of hate” that inspired a clearly schizophrenic individual to shoot a bunch of random people. (Including a conservative federal judge—and, incidentally, the only public official killed by the insinuated “right-wing-inspired” killer. By the way, what was that slain conservative judge’s name again? Oh…you don’t know? Why not? If you heard his name mentioned in casual conversation, would you immediately recognize it as belonging to the lone political murder of Jared Loughner? What about for the name “Gabrielle Giffords”—would you recognize that name if brought up randomly? And might the name “Sarah Palin” also come to mind, attached, as it were, as if by some causal link? You may wish to re-read the paragraph above that begins with “It is a fact…”)

So, in this MSM-created miasma of “guilty-before-proven-innocent”, only to be followed by “guilty-despite-being-proven-innocent”, did you hear about the guy who threatened—on camera, during an ABC news episode about the “camaraderie” and “coming together” of the Tucson community after the tragedy—the very life of a Tea Party leader in the audience? (Quote: “You’re dead.“) Hmm? We do still hear talk about “toning down the rhetoric” and engaging in “civil discourse” don’t we? (Which, of course, applies only to Republicans and conservatives and not—not, I repeat—to Democrats and liberals.) Well, what about this story—about a guy clearly driven to his violent hate of a Tea Partier courtesy of the MSM’s obsession with insinuating—if not some outright declaring—that the blame for the murder of six innocent people lie squarely upon those in the quote-unquote “Tea Party”?

What about the rally in Oakland ostensibly held for the same purpose—to honor the Tucson victims and stand in solidarity with the survivors—the one that descended into an anti-white, anti-conservative hate-fest…which the local news obligingly tuned out? That story ring a bell?

Amplify that which fits the agenda, minimize or omit that which detracts from it.

Besides not wanting to put the Liberal Establishment’s foot soldiers (and thus the Liberal Establishment itself) in a bad light, anyone else find it highly coincidental that a local channel in Oakland, the national news network ABC, and who knows how many other local news bureaus that honest citizen journalists may have missed, found it so important to start broadcasting stories specifically about national solidarity with the Tucson shooting victims…right around the time President Obama made his official speech in Tucson…a speech that was literally branded—replete with white & blue (what? no red?) posters and placards and t-shirts and such—with the slogan “Together We Thrive”? Pure coincidence that the MSM seemed to be marching in lock-step with the White House’s message, so much so that they systematically flagrantly dropped any and all evidence that the country was not only not united in grief, but was, in fact, viciously divided thanks to liberals’ immediate attempts the nation over to exploit the tragedy as a means to smear and silence their political opponents?

Again, are journalists there to drive the federal government’s message—even if, as in this case, the message is an entirely appropriate one—or to report the truth—the whole truth, and nothing but the truth—of whatever it is they’re covering?

And between these two poles—between [poorly] surreptitiously advancing the ruling class’s talking points vs. stalwart reporting of the facts, no matter how inconvenient or demoralizing they may be—where do the actions of the MSM consistently lie?

Speaking of people being driven to violent acts by the words of politicians and the climate their sycophants create, anyone remember the story about the guy who went on a shooting rampage at Discovery Channel headquarters…because—BECAUSE—in his own words—he was inspired by Al Gore’s fraudulent “documentary”
An Inconvenient Truth? Remember that? Remember all the conservatives on “radical, right-wing” Fox “Faux” News implying that Al Gore, the global “global warming” conspiracy, the socialistic greenies, and the legions of all the above’s useful idiots were to blame for this shooting? Don’t remember that either? That’s because it never happened. See, when one is based in reality, it’s easy to understand that crazy people will do crazy things and draw inspiration from anywhere. We should no more shut-up Al Gore or Sarah Palin or the Tea Partiers than we should censor all movies and images of Jodie Foster because John Hinckley Jr. shot President Ronald Reagan out of his psychotic obsession with the actress. Conservatives get that. Liberals don’t.

Because leftist thinking isn’t based in reality. It’s based in power. And they [leftists] will do and say anything and everything to maintain that power.

I’ll leave with just a few of the more recent gems from our USSA’s state-led MSM:

• Remember those KKK members in full garb standing outside the voting booths during the 2008 Presidential elections, brandishing cudgels and yelling threatening, racial slurs at black voters? Remember all the media attention that received? Remember when multiple members of the Department of Justice resigned in protest because they claimed the DoJ was actively refusing to prosecute white people, instead focusing their efforts on prosecuting blacks and Hispanics instead? Remember when an internal investigation backed up these claims and found the DoJ was, in fact, espousing a race-based agenda regarding pursuing federal prosecutions? Remember? Right; I’ve reversed the races here, so this story has been dutifully swept under the rug.
• Say, recall the endless headlines whenever an anti-abortion extremist murders an extremist abortionist? And what happens when the murderer is an abortionist? Crickets, perhaps?
• I think the MSM forgot to tell the DR about the wonders and strengths of diversity! Dominican crackdown on Haitian migrants sows fear
• Anyone hear about this little tidbit? I’m guessing not.
• MSM devotees, happen to catch this story? Behold the glory of lax immigration policies and open borders!
• And for the win: Just how eager are “journalists” to report anything that helps them to smear the right? Answer: This eager.

And on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on…ad nauseum.

“There’s no earthly way of knowing,
Which direction we are going.
There’s no knowing where we’re rowing
Or which way the river’s flowing.
Is it raining?
Is it snowing?
Is a hurricane a-blowing?
Not a speck of light is showing,
So the danger must be growing.
Are the fires of hell a glowing?
Is the grisly reaper mowing?
Yes! The danger must be growing,
For the rowers keep on rowing,
And they’re certainly not showing
Any signs that they are slowing!”

“Wonka, this has gone far enough!”

“Quite right, Sir! STOP THE BOAT!”

To all who have eyes yet are not yet seeing the danger, I beg you, stop the boat!

Liberalism: The More it Fails, the More it Succeeds

1965 [Immigration Reform] Hart-Cellar Act removed all those mean, “racist” quotas and let anyone from anywhere in the world immigrate to the US.

Of course, this was the work of liberals.

And conservative detractors at the time were assured by their liberal “friends” that there would be no upsetting of national demographics as a result.

Fast-forward 45 years. The white population of the US has gone from ~90% as of 1965 to 53% as of 2010, and is likely to dip below 50% by 2020.

Which demographics had the most gains since then? Hispanics, followed by blacks.

What else has happened alongside this rise of the black and “Latino” populations, and the fall of the white population?

• Obesity has become an “epidemic”.
• Health care costs have grown exponentially.
• Entitlement costs (myriad welfare benefits, Medicaid, Medicare, earned-income tax credits for low-wage earners, etc.) are bankrupting the country.
• Educational achievement is tanking and, in completely inverse proportion, the cost of education is exploding.
• Confidence in America’s leadership is at an all-time low, corresponding to an all-time low of both the competence and fidelity of said leadership.
• Random, violent, sadistic crime—particularly perpetrated against women and children—has become the norm.
• The rule of law is flagrantly ignored in all of America’s most “diverse” cities.
• Muslims have been free to come into our nation and kill innocent American civilians by the tens, hundreds, and thousands.
• A giant federal police state has been erected to deal with these Muslim immigrants—who since 1965, of course, have been allowed to freely enter the country.
• Americans—and their businesses—are more regulated, more taxed, more policed, and more controlled by their government—i.e., we are less free—than at any other time in the history of the nation.

So, one might conclude that the liberals’ 1965 wet dream of immigration reform has been a complete, catastrophic, total bust, no?

Of course it has. But the Liberal Establishment, which controls the messaging to the populace via the media, academia, and political discourse, would never admit as much and continues to shift blame to the usual suspects: whites, Christians, and conservatives.

So, in light of this, what’s the solution?

Well, on the topic of gun violence, according to this “scientist” and this “scientific periodical”, the answer is simple: Socialism!

Like Homer Simpson said of beer: “Liberalism: The cause of—and solution to—all of life’s problems!”