They’re both wrong, BTW. Which is usually the case when the Stupid Party and the kook left start “arguing” about race.
They’re both wrong, BTW. Which is usually the case when the Stupid Party and the kook left start “arguing” about race.
Okay, what was going in with LGBTQMIAPDLOLPLPLTH in 1953 that we have to know about it now?
The events of fifty years ago today and the aftermath, from a roadgeek perspective.
Today is the sesquicentennial of the Second Constitutional Convention.
JFK wasn’t too successful in seeing his own agenda come to fruition. Eventually, someone else would be successful in implementing many parts of it, and we see how big of a wreck it was.
It makes you want to go back to 1960 and vote for the other guy.
PJB and his soft spot blind side for Nixon…I tell ‘ya.
George Will: The JFK assassination was the impetus that took the mainstream Democratic left from a force that merely wanted liberal economics and union policies to a rabid gang of foaming-at-the-mouth culture warriors. The case boils down to this: Because the doer was a communist, the left had to cover that up. So they cloaked the assassination in terms of indicting American culture, and their doing that provoked leftist identity politics and the left side of the culture wars.
I think that shift in the left, the proto-hippie culture was already taking place before the assassination. What may be more accurate to say is that the assassination let that genie out of the bottle.
What does this all mean? If the official story re JFK assassination is true, then the conspiracy mongering had and still has its roots in the mainstream left and the media to distract from Oswald’s left wing extremism. This I think is similar to the way that Official America fetes the obsession with aliens and UFOs, the people doing that make you think that they’re telling you what the government doesn’t want you to know, but doing so on 500+ FCC-licensed radio stations on the midnight show. (Meanwhile, when was the last time Jared Taylor’s voice was heard on terrestrial FCC-licensed broadcast media?) We already know that on the matter of the Roswell incident, the Feds for decades played a game of good cop (weather balloon) bad cop (aliens), when the truth they were covering up was that they were spying on the Soviet Union’s nuclear ambitions, and what crashed at Roswell were the snooping implements.
Just two days after “I Have a Dream” in Washington, D.C., the local “I Have a Dreamers” started in on their marching in front of Jefferson Bank.
And the P-D is right: Even now, a half century later, the legacy lives on. One of the marchers, a 32-year old St. Louis City alderman by the name of William Lacy Clay, rode the publicity of doing that into running for and winning a race for Congress in 1968. He’d stay in Congress until 2000, when he essentially willed the seat to his eponymous son, who is still there.
Maybe one day, we’ll be able to overcome constant overcoming.
Asheville, North Carolina
So here goes:
Helper was a Unionist in the South who took that position for racial reasons. He thought a Union military victory in the WBTS would lead to blacks being returned to Africa or deported somewhere else. He was also the pioneer of the notion that slavery hurt non-rich whites in the South, and that’s a matter of common sense: Cheap or free labor paradigms and systems always hurt the native born working classes. (Hint: Immigration.)
The problem was, racially-motivated Southern Unionism turned out to be what I call a schmuck ideology. A point of view that is bona fide and well intentioned, and certainly its adherents aren’t schmucks, but a schmuck ideology is doomed to fail in its intended purpose because those who advocate it are advocating it out of naivete, delusional hope, or they make some false assumptions. Similar examples of schmuck ideologies today are liberal white nationalism (think: the former blogger Half Sigma, but again, I’m not calling HS a schmuck), and philo-Semitic white nationalism.
By the time Helper wrote Ns in N-Land in 1868, it was obvious to him that he was totally Punk’d with his Unionist advocacy, and as bad as the system of black slavery was, what replaced it was worse. I take this book as a cry of desperation, a tract basically begging north of the M-D line to knock off their egalitarian craziness.
Helper also thought that the United States should have comprised all of North America (“Bering Strait to the Isthmus of Darien (Panama)”), and at one point, suggested that it could comprise all of North and South America. As bad as the blacks were, imagine the fix we’d be in today with all those Hispanics, Indos and Mezos, not to mention all the blacks and mulattoes in Latin America. Every non-white Chicano, Mestizo, Indian, black and mulatto from the Rio Grande to Tierra del Fuego would be voting in American elections and on the American welfare state.
At one point in Ns in N-Land, he had a chapter about the extinction of black Africans, implicitly stating he thought that would happen by compiling statements from others predicting that. We can forgive them for thinking that, because they were merely making projections based on their current circumstances. They couldn’t foresee the rise of the white do-gooder, the welfare state, both domestic and international, and the EBT card. Black Africans are anything but going extinct today.
That which made Helper really smart and insightful in a lot of things in turn made him kind of a crackpot in other things. The whole fine line between genius and insanity thing.
I think Helper presumed that the deaborginialization campaign that American whites successfully waged in what was American territory at the time (and would for about another generation) would successfully be continued at least in the whole of the North American continent and perhaps also in South America. Another thing he couldn’t have foreseen was white people collectively losing their will, though the egalitarian craziness that was unleashed after Appomattox should have been a foreboding hint of things to come.
The weakest generation?
In my mother’s telling, I exist because of the March on Washington.
Her account went something like this: In 1963, she was a student at Goddard College, an experimental school in Vermont that attracted the forerunners of the hippies. My father had come to Goddard the previous year, and though my mom first noticed him throwing peas in the dining hall (this seems to be an inherited trait), she didn’t meet him, she said, until that day on the Mall 50 years ago this week, when Goddard students who had arrived separately executed a daft plan to meet near the Washington Monument.
Alas, my father, when I asked him about it this week, had no such recollection. My mother died five years ago, so I’ll never know whether her account — my founding narrative — is apocryphal, or whether memory of it has been clouded by things people did to their minds in the ’60s. Perhaps it doesn’t matter. Whether they first met that day or not, my future parents, 20 years old at the time, were both there for the signal event of their generation.
Something profound and later “historic” happens at a ball game in a stadium that holds 45,000 people. Thirty years later, a million people say they were there.
Don’t you know? Everybody was at the Martin Luther King March on Washington, and everybody marched from Selma to Montgomery. Even if you were born after those events took place, you were there. Dana Milbank, born in 1968, insinuates that he was pre-there, based on his mother’s version of his events which his father cannot corroborate.
Asheville, North Carolina
“…the Negroes here [in the postwar South], very many of them at least, have hithero been afforded opportunities, for both an education and for an easy and comfortable livelihood, far superior to the opportunities which were generally enjoyed by the poorer classes of white people.”
Your Blogmeister’s Desk
I’m slowly making my way through Hintan Rowan Helper’s The Negroes in Negroland, 1868.
Norm will be interested in the only whole paragraph on Page 163. OTOH, that paragraph is relevant today because that’s why Head Start seems to work. It’s given to black children at the times in their lives when they are about on par with if not a little more advanced than white children of the same age when it comes to brain development. But then comes the fifth grade…
Of course, this chapter was right after a chapter that predicted the extinction of black Africans for various reasons. Neither Mr. Helper nor the people who wrote the things they wrote which he compiled could have possibly predicted the rise of the do-gooder or the welfare state. They’re anything but extinct today.
Otherwise, this book is a gold mine. Those of us who can see will read this paragraph or that paragraph and know that there’s truly nothing new under the sun. At one point, the white author is asking the young black African who is a slave to another black African why he didn’t buy his own freedom even though he had the resources to do so. His response was that not only did he have all the freedom he could ever want while being in bondage, but that he wanted to use his resources to buy himself a slave.
Rev. Jed DeValleyism on AR found this:
Emerson praised this book? Watch all the modern day libs’ brains blue screen.
Livingstone was wrong though. He forgot to add “the passions of the loins.”
Human Events recognizes the 60th anniversary of Whittaker Chambers’s Witness, which crosses a real world expose of Communist infiltration of the United States during the early Cold War years with a Brave New World style examination of human nature.
HE strikes out with this part, though:
Since 1952, the media and most historians have tried to blackball the memory of Chambers while resurrecting the ghost of Joseph McCarthy at every opportunity. The Wisconsin Senator had holes in his allegations that a battleship could float through, but Chambers could back every assertion with details and evidence. What’s more, the former Time editor came from a media background. His speech and writing were simple and unadorned, but also clearly intellectual in ideas. Liberal America could not simply dismiss him as easily as McCarthy.
Yet Chambers’ role in history was far more dangerous to liberal designs. First, he inspired two of the guiding intellects of the postwar conservative movement, William F. Buckley and Novak. Most importantly, Chambers threw a punch in the gut to the New Deal coalition’s main philosophical pillar, that the American people should place more trust in Washington bureaucracy than any other institution. New Deal apparatchiks sought to reshape the nation, all the while promising Americans that they could place 100 percent trust in their federal government, as opposed to corrupt state systems, or “greedy” businessmen. The media was the Greek chorus that echoed the government line. Chambers explained how many Soviet spies started in social welfare agencies and moved up into positions where they could undermine and sabotage the nation. Witness reminds Americans that it is a civic duty to not completely trust the government and individuals working within it, but to remember Ronald Reagan’s important maxim of “trust, but verify.” Only God has earned the unquestioning trust of mankind.
Okay, if Chambers was so much more dangerous to the Big Bad Ugly System than McCarthy, then why did the Big Bad Ugly System feel the need to destroy McCarthy and not Chambers? Because you can judge a man based on the decibel levels of the stuck pig squealing against him. McCarthy was far more “dangerous” than Chambers because McCarthy was assembling a full frontal assault against the American political-domestic-foreign policy establishment that would have transcended the banal Democrat-Republican left-right conventional politics of the day. (The more things change…) And far from “having holes in his allegations that a battleship could float through,” time has patched up those holes.
The other reason McCarthy had to be destroyed and his name turned into a cuss word even to this day? Because genuinely anti-establishment movements just might unmask and name certain people and certain types of people who want to remain unmasked and unnamed. That’s all I’ll say — You can fill in the rest for yourself.
They’re lauding Chambers for inspiring Buckley? After the way Buckley did one purge after another after another after another of genuine right-thinking people from NR and the “conservative” bowel movement such that it’s not really conservative anymore? (Hint: Buckley’s nephew endorsed Obama) I wouldn’t count that as an accomplishment. Buckley’s raison d’etre in life was not to stand athwart history and yell “Stop,” it was to stand athwart history and say, “Slow down a little bit! And let me drive the train every once in awhile!” Because Buckley has personal links to the CIA, I honestly think that, when you boil it all down, the CIA sent in Buckley to neutralize conservatism so that it would no longer be a McCarthy-style threat to the establishment. And I’m saying this as someone whose mind is not given to this way of thinking, and as someone who wishes there was a better and more accurate way to say what I just said.
The Monarch Levee broke, which was the only thing standing between the way above flood stage all that summer Missouri River and the Chesterfield Valley. This was the end result. That’s Highway 40 (now also Interstate 64) looking westbound as it descended into the flooded valley.
Back in 1993, the Chesterfield Valley was still mostly farm land and Spirit Airport. Ever since the Monarch Levee was repaired and fortified, much more development, both big box retail and office space, and a small sports arena, has happened in the Valley. With more to come.
If being rejected by the established music business was legitimate grounds for mass murder, then humanity would be extinct by now.
By the time you finish reading this sentence, three musical acts have given up on their dreams of stardom.
St. Louis History
They save the best for last:
Some delegates wanted to give the party nomination to George McGovern, the Democrat challenging President Richard Nixon. But most of the energy went to writing the platform, which called for bringing home all troops, not just those in Vietnam. It also proposed a 30-hour week for all workers, free mass transit and health care, minimum and maximum annual personal incomes, and laws forbidding police from carrying weapons.
With the Nixon-McGovern campaign dominating headlines, the People’s Party accepted what coverage it could get. After delegate Ralph Waldo Jaeger of New York nominated Spock, a tardy TV cameraman asked him to repeat his speech. Jaeger did, with extra fervor.
Nixon won the election in a 49-state landslide. Spock and his running mate, Washington civil-rights lawyer and activist Julius Hobson, managed only 0.1 percent of the vote. The People’s Party ran another slate in 1976, then disbanded. Spock died in 1998.
The party platforms of political parties that actually have a chance to win are, as Bob Dole said, “meaningless pieces of paper.” Especially in the Republican Party, wherein so many pretty solid and right-thinking people waste so much time to craft a document at a convention that the person that convention nominates for President never reads much less heeds, and in the case of their 1996 nominee, trashes. The people who spend so much time and energy to write a crackpot platform for a crackpot party that has no chance to win are wasting time they’ll never get back, time that would be better spent bowling.
Mind you, “30-hour week” wasn’t just crackpot talk, as it turned out. Those of you being cut back to 29 hours a week so that your bosses can dodge the ObamaCare (“free health care”) bullet can personally attest to that.
“Laws forbidding the police from carrying weapons.” Obviously written by a thug. Maybe this “People’s Party” convention was funded with drug money.
This year is fifty years after 1963. That means that everything of importance that happened in 1963, this year is the 50th anniversary of it, including The Biggie on November 22.
Locally, today is the 50th of the Forest Park Highlands fire. It burnt to a crisp what was then the only amusement park (as opposed to an Unamusement Park, and yes, I’m glad he’s delaying his blogging retirement), and for the eight years that followed, until Six Flags over Texas opened up a location in Eureka, St. Louis was without an amusement park.
If a fire wasn’t going to get Forest Park Highlands, something else would have eventually got it. I’ll let you guess — I’m only giving you one guess, even though most of you will only need one guess.
Today, SLCC-Forest Park sits on those grounds, and its sports teams are called the Highlanders.
What kind of religious fanatic/gun nut would write this shit?
I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated, by succeeding Generations, as the great anniversary Festival. It ought to be commemorated, as the Day of Deliverance by solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations from one End of this Continent to the other from this Time forward forever more.
“Illuminations.” I guess fireworks qualify.
Doris Kearns Goodwin at Gettysburg: A Few Inappropriate Remarks
On Sunday, a stunned audience sat in silence as Doris Kearns Goodwin turned the keynote address at the opening ceremony for the 150th anniverary of the Battle of Gettysburg into a political lecture focusing on women’s and gay rights.
Missing from much of her keynote: Gettysburg.
Self-centered, insular, and oblivious to the occasion, the historian who was infamously caught plagiarizing, merely recycled much of what she has said before about herself in previous speeches. And her rambling, self-promoting, and borderline inappropriate lecture touched upon nearly everything except for the heroic sacrifices made on that battlefield.
In so doing, she desecrated the hallowed land on which she spoke, dishonored Gettysburg’s honored dead, and disrespected the nearly 8,000 Americans in attendance who did not come to Gettysburg to hear about her life’s story and a progressive history lecture.
I disagree. The concept of universal human equality won on July 3, 1865 in Gettsyburg, Pennsylvania when the enemy forces beat the Army of Northern Virginia. One hundred and thirty nine days later in the same town, President Adolph Lenin essentially engaged in an illegal one-man Constitutional convention by a 270-word executive fiat, by falsely assigning racially egalitarian motives to both the secession of thirteen British colonies on the American continent from the British Empire four score and seven years prior and the founding documents drafted in that spirit both in that year and the next decade.
It’s not a big step from racial equality to gender and orientation equality.
Do you think Union supporter Karl Marx called the concept of civil rights “a revolution in permanence” as a practical joke?
Calvin Coolidge was the last President who signed legislation to reduce the amount of legal immigration into the United States.
Dwight Eisenhower was the last President who actually took enforcing immigration law seriously.
The Superpower Takes a Breather
France just smashed al Qaeda in Mali with little more than moral support from the United States. Washington didn’t even lead from behind. Americans did not lead at all. This time we sat on the sidelines while France—France!—led and did everything from the front.
Last winter the entire northern part of the northwest African country was seized by Ansar al-Dine and al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, who together transformed it into a Taliban-style terrorist state. The famous ancient trading city of Timbuktu—long a mecca for adventurous tourists and the host of an annual international music festival—became a grotesque, hand-chopping tyranny that hemorrhaged violence and refugees.
The international community dithered for almost a year, as if an al Qaeda state isn’t all that big a deal. But when the Islamists began expanding south toward the capital and took the city of Gao, France dispatched its war planes and ground troops and threw the bad guys out in a matter of weeks. Its fighter jets are currently pounding terrorist camps deep in the Sahara near the Algerian border.
President François Hollande visited Timbuktu over the weekend and was hailed as a liberator by throngs of residents, including imams, yelling “Vive la France!”
Yeah, it’s kinda ironic that the great Western African Taliban we got all worked up in a lather over, so much so that I would have never approved anything but drone and air strikes against, folded like the cheap deck of cards we now know they were all along and surrendered to a country which has an undeserved reputation as surrender monkeys.
But I totally forgot one crucial elementary difference between Taliban cum Afghanistan and Taliban cum Mali: The former is constituted by battle-hardened South Asians, almost Caucasian and Indo-European, who have been fighting off assault after assault, empire after empire, going back to the days of Alexander the Macedon. The latter is constituted of black Africans. So, the former is somewhere between well-organized militia and military, and the latter is somewhere between n-word-rigged street gang and militia.
New York State
And no, don’t bring Gandhi and MLK into this, as I suspect many of you want to. These two are probably two of the most overrated figures of the 20th Century. Do you honestly think that some brown hippie wearing a potato sack and spectacles dislodged the Indian subcontinent from the British Empire? No, it happened because at some point between Hitler’s invasion of Poland and Pearl Harbor, Churchill begged FDR to save England from Germany. The conversation went something like this: Churchill: “How much is this going to cost me?” FDR sticks his hand out to Churchill: “Exactly one empire, please, after tax.” (Payback for those little 1775 and 1812 deals, you know.) You think NORAD is just an outfit that produces cute videos every December 24? It’s actually how the American Empire annexed Canada from the British Empire after WWII. Ditto ANZUS for Australia and New Zealand. I’m sure there’s a similar “treaty organization” with India. Trivia: Rush Limbaugh Sr. (the grandfather) was one of many lawyers appointed by President Eisenhower to help design a legal system for the newly “independent” India after we dislodged India from the British Empire we were sawing apart piece by piece.
Similarly, that hustling whoremongering miscreant with “Michael King” on his birth certificate, whose “day” I’m not celebrating today, had nothing to do with the civil rights movement. That was largely a function of Irish-American and Jewish-American growing political power (and their dick riders like LBJ) getting back at WASP-y Brahmin-y “traditional” America for real or perceived slights from many decades before. (And don’t bitch at me — I have both Irish and Jewish as minor parts of my ethnic constitution).
Point is, you newly minted third class sub-human “gun owners” of New York State, you can’t play the same civil disobedience games. They’ll find the prison space for you even though there is none for actual murderers — You can count on it. Point is, you better move yourselves and your pieces south of the once and future international border while there still isn’t a border, and before one is put back up and we won’t want you because you helped fuck up your own state’s politics and we won’t let you immigrate across it so you can’t do to us what you did to yourselves. Or better yet you can grok this (*) and set your minds right, and maybe we might have a chance to re-Americanize all of America.
(*) – Even those of us on the correct side of the once and future international border should grok that, because it’s not as if we’re going much better by ourselves. I wish I had a dime for every “Don’t Mess With Texas” bumper sticker I see all the while I know that most of Texas’s elite is letting Mexico mess with Texas.
Libs orgasmic over “gun control” and practically getting their rocks off over “assault weapons.”
Ironically, as I told you back in the spring, lib law profs were floating the trial balloon to use the Militia Act of 1792 to defend ObamaCare’s individual mandate. That act required able bodied white men 17-45 to buy what was an “assault weapon” (for its day) plus an armament that was the rough equivalent of a handgun, plus enough gunpowder, ammo and a bayonet, among other things. I’m not a big gun geek, but I am told that roughly translating the construction of the MA 1792 to modern times, it would mandate an AR-15 and a Ruger 9, not based on raw functionality compared to each other, but based on common availability and affordability and their functionality relative to the available armaments of the day in the same class. Likewise, the best selling four-door family sedan in 2011 would be a far better more powerful more reliable car than the best selling four-door family sedan in 1957, (I know I’ll get some argument there), so if there was a law in 1957 that required every nuclear family to buy a Ford Fairlane, the best selling four-door sedan of that model year, the equivalently crafted law in 2011 would require every nuclear family to buy a Toyota Camry, ibid.
I don’t know if the Obamaites actually used that argument at SCOTUS, but I don’t remember any final SCOTUS opinion on ObamaCare, either majority, concurring or dissenting, mentioning it at all much less endorsing it or rebuking it as legal reasoning, so my guess is that they didn’t and it was just a leftist trial balloon. All I know is that Benedict Dyslexic Roberts somehow read “mandate” in the bill and wound up interpreting “tax” out of it.
My least favorite Christmas Carol. This was cut in 1984, a year before We Are The World, which probably means Africa must have been some serious PC/SWPL fad in the mid-1980s. For some strange reason, the all Christmas all the time stations have been overplaying this song every Christmas for the last five seasons, including this one. Maybe it has something to do with the person of Barack H. Obama II being either President or President-Elect during that time. Or maybe that’s just a coincidence.
The purpose of this cheerful song is to make honkeys feel guilty about feeling happy in our first world Christmas while there’s
black people suffering in Africa. The song asks rhetorically, “do they know it’s Christmas in Africa?”
Short answer: They wouldn’t, by themselves, for a very good reason.
Christmas is basically a warmed over observation of the Winter Solstice and its approximation with the new calendar year. From whence we honkies came, mid-northern to far northern latitudes, it made sense to reset the year at the WS, because you could fit an entire growing season within a year. Another reason it made sense that from the moment of the WS, the length of the day would start to get longer, so the first half of the year would by definition feature lengthening days, mid-year would be the longest day, and the latter half of the year would by definition feature shortening days.
Where black Africans are indigenous, tropical African latitudes, there is little variance in either the length of the day or the seasonal climate, save monsoonal seasons, depending. Mostly, the growing season is all the time, but “growing season” is a misnomer, because it’s not as if black Africans developed anything close to sophisticated agriculture on their own. The berries and the low hanging fruit just grew, and you went and got whenever you wanted to eat. The EBT of the day, so to speak. This makes the Band-Aid lyric “in our world of plenty” in this song misplaced, because in a base sense, a place with a shorter than year long growing season can’t be more of a “world of plenty” than a place with a year long growing season.
The long and short of it is that, no, they wouldn’t have known it’s Christmas, because they wouldn’t know or care that it’s the winter solstice. For the day we now think of as December 21 +/- was to the tropical black African just another day when the sun would rise about where it always has and set about where it always has, it might rain, it might not, it was hot and humid nonetheless, low hanging fruit was there, his rival might impale him with a spear, or maybe not, he might get lucky with only one woman, or the Chief would bring him a captured concubine of women from an enemy tribe to gang bang, but usually not.
But, thanks to cargo cult and gibsmedat, they know it’s Christmas now!
While there was a 91% top marginal personal income tax rate between WWII and the JFK Presidency, virtually no dollars were ever exposed to that tax rate, because the income threshold for that rate was so extremely high, plus deductions, and the existence of trust funds. In fact, there were many tax FIT tax brackets, compared to the two that existed from about 1985 to 1990, three from 1990 to 1993 and five from 1993 to the present. The reason nobody cared is because almost all income earners were in lower brackets. But, since the bracket thresholds weren’t automagically indexed to inflation, (doing that only started in 1985), as post-1964 inflation kicked in, household incomes kept experiencing bracket creep, and taxed at rates that almost nobody’s income was taxed at in the 1950s.
I think the best solution going forward is a single rate FIT with the only deductions being personal, spousal and dependent, with a relatively manageable rate, and extending FICA rates to all income. Tax-free trust funds and most non-profit organizations…gone. There should also be a 50% rule, in that no person should be made to pay more than half his income in total taxes to all levels of government, which means that if someone’s total tax remittances, FIT + FICA + State (if applicable) + Local (if applicable) + documented sales taxes paid + The personal property and real estate taxes on at most one residence and at most two automobiles (we don’t need to subsidize Jay Leno’s car collection) is more than half of his or her income, the Feds will send them a rebate for the delta amount that is over 50%.
I’m not for a VAT. If we’re going to have Federal sales taxes, they should be on the retail end only, because a 10% VAT means exactly the same end-user retail cost increase as would a 10% retail end-user sales tax, only a VAT is a bureaucratic nightmare and more of a lead anchor on the economy than a regular sales tax.
Mexico Del Norte
1980: Carter 56%, Reagan 35%, Anderson et al. 9%. D+21
1984: Mondale 61%, Reagan 37%. D+24
1986: Reagan signs amnesty bill, Simpson-Mazzoli Act
1988: Dukakis 69%, Bush 30%. D+39 (i.e. Hispanics rewarding Republicans for amnesty)
1992: Clinton 61%, Bush 25%, Perot 14%. D+36
1996: Clinton 72%, Dole 21%. D+51 (moderates are how you get Hispanic votes)
2000: Gore 62%, Bush 35%. D+27
2004: Kerry 58%, Bush 40%. D+18 (Even with Bush slinging the borders wide open, canceling immigration law enforcement, and handing out subprime mortgages to Hispanics like candy, a near-billionaire plutocrat still beats the Republican by 18 points)
2007: John McCain, Ted Kennedy and George W. Bush push hard for amnesty
2008: Obama 67%, McCain 31%. D+36. (That’s Juan McAmnesty to you.)
2012 March: Romney ditches Kris Kobach to embrace the amnesty and cheap labor lobby
2012 November: Obama 71%, Romney 27%. D+44
The future: Republicans push for more amnesty and more open borders, Andrew Cuomo beats Marco Rubio in the 2016 Presidential election by 45-50 points among Hispanics.
I’ve thought about this. I was reflecting on this over the weekend. I actually think Bill Clinton himself has been more damaging to our country than Watergate was. Watergate is considered the scandal of all scandals. I think Clinton’s eight years — and I’m not talking about just policy or issues. The overall decline in what was expected of leaders, the overall decline in the requirements that we had of people leading us.
They be better people than average. Smarter, morally rock solid — as much as anybody can be. (I mean, everybody fails.) If it were to happen today… Just to illustrate? If Watergate were to happen today, and it was a Democrat president, it would be accepted. It would maybe be, in fact, praised as a brilliant political move in winning the election. Because that’s all anything is about is the reelection of a Democrat.
So if a Democrat today perpetrated a Watergate or worse, it would be accepted. And anybody who criticized it or raised questions about it would be considered to be a troublemaker or a rabble-rouser or an “extreme right-winger” or what have you. And all because of the permitted and accepted rehabilitation of Bill Clinton to the status he now holds. All the stuff that he did has been forgotten, thrown away, or not kept properly in context.
It’s worse than Rush imagines. The reason the Watergate burglars broke into that hotel room is that they were trying to find evidence that George McGovern had solid links to the Communist Party, either the Soviet version or the American version. If the situation was reversed, and a Democrat President ordered a burglary of a hotel room to find out if the Republican nominee for President had links to some foreign fascist regime or domestic group with “Nazi” in its name, and then obstructed justice in the subsequent investigation, Official America would not only write it off as NBD, but quietly justify his actions, the actions of his cabinet and of the burglars, because “they were saving us from Hitler 2.0.” With a few “never agains” from the “poverty” and “defamation” groups scattered in for good measure.
‘Highly offensive’: Ark. GOP blasts candidates’ statements on slavery, Muslims
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — Arkansas Republicans tried to distance themselves Saturday from a Republican state representative’s assertion that slavery was a “blessing in disguise” and a Republican state House candidate who advocates deporting all Muslims.
The claims were made in books written, respectively, by Rep. Jon Hubbard of Jonesboro and House candidate Charlie Fuqua of Batesville. Those books received attention on Internet news sites Friday.
On Saturday, state GOP Chairman Doyle Webb called the books “highly offensive.” And U.S. Rep. Rick Crawford, a Republican who represents northeast Arkansas, called the writings “divisive and racially inflammatory.”
Hubbard wrote in his 2009 self-published book, “Letters To The Editor: Confessions Of A Frustrated Conservative,” that “the institution of slavery that the black race has long believed to be an abomination upon its people may actually have been a blessing in disguise.” He also wrote that African-Americans were better off than they would have been had they not been captured and shipped to the United States.
Fuqua, who served in the Arkansas House from 1996 to 1998, wrote there is “no solution to the Muslim problem short of expelling all followers of the religion from the United States,” in his 2012 book, titled “God’s Law.”
Half right, he is.
Muslims can’t do anything to us that we won’t let them do by letting them immigrate to where we are to begin with. Remember, I have said here in this space that KSM confessed that he and AQ wanted to commit acts of terrorism in Japan when they co-hosted the Soccer World Cup in 2002, but they couldn’t get a ground network going in the country. And the reason they couldn’t do that is because Japan is an ethnostate and has and enforces immigration law like an ethnostate. Take the hint, America, Europe, Australia, etc.
True, Pak has nukes and Iran may soon have them, but they won’t nuke us because their leaders grok MAD.
As far as the other part, we have problems. To me, it’s as simple as the “if I would have known this, I would have picked my own damned cotton” doctrine. True, American blacks are far better off than they would have been, but American whites are worse off. One of the untold negative consequences of slavery of any sort in the South is that it precluded the development of a real middle class, just as today’s neo-slavery (cheap Hispanic labor) is degrading the middle and working middle class. When you add in the “Who? Whom?” factor of slavery, it eventually created an expensive and obnoxious black undertow that slowed American growth and progress.
Another lamer con publication is going there.
On the eve of perestroika
In the life of almost all civilizations, a time comes where, as Yeats put it, “things fall apart.” The internal principles and assumptions that used to seem to work begin to break down. If the engines of growth have not ground to a halt, they certainly could use some fresh oil: stagnation replaces new opportunities. Everything that used to work suddenly doesn’t. What would have been an easy projection of power settles into a stalemate.
Recent history tells a very different story, however. According to the BEA, between January 2001 and January 2012 the economy grew at an average annual rate of just 1.6%, less than half the average annual growth rate of the second half of the twentieth century. Nor can we entirely blame this stagnation on President Obama or even the Great Recession. During President George W. Bush’s presidency, from January 2001 to January 2009, annual GDP growth averaged 1.4%. Even during the period of growth between 2001 and 2007, annual GDP growth was just 2.7%. The supposed boom times in the past decade have lagged behind the average growth of the past; only about one year of the Bush presidency saw GDP growth greater than the average of the past. The Great Recession has only underlined the lost economic ground: as of April 2012, real GDP had only increased by about 2% since the economic peak of mid-2007. The U.S. economy has barely grown at all since 2007; that’s almost five years of average economic growth well under 1%.
Something has gone awry in the U.S. economy over the past decade. The Cold War provides a troubling parallel here. By the late 1970s and early 1980s, Soviet growth began to slow considerably. By how much it slowed remains a point of contention (the notorious secrecy of Kremlin bureaucrats makes exact economic numbers hard to pin down), but official C.I.A. numbers estimated that average annual economic growth for the Soviet Union was about 1.9% between 1975 and 1980 and 1.8% between 1980 and 1985. These estimates would give the Soviet Union a faster average growth rate between 1975 and 1985 than the United States has seen in the past decade. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, many charged the C.I.A. with overestimating Soviet growth, particularly in the 1970s and 1980s. An alternative measure, established by economist G.I. Khanin, finds that the U.S.S.R. grew at an annual rate of 1% between 1975 and 1980 and at an annual rate of 0.6% between 1980 and 1985. This statistic puts U.S. growth in a slightly better light, but one can only take so much solace from the fact that the United States has still had almost five years of average annual growth at or below the most pessimistic estimates of Soviet growth rates in the early 1980s. Even by the standards of a Soviet five-year plan, the last five years of the American economy’s growth have been disappointing.
One thing that might be going in our favor is that percentage growth figures will never be that large again because our denominator is so large. Who would you rather be? A 100% annual personal net worth growth rate person who had $1 last year and now has $2, or a 1% annual personal net worth growth rate person who had $1,000,000,000 last year and now has $1,010,000,000? I know for certain the latter person could afford to buy 2043 Park Avenue, the former person never.
Still, if the parallel holds, then the real reason for both the collapse of the USSR and the eventual collapse of the USA is a reason that “economic man” thinkers who write for Daily Caller can never grok: Multiethnic/multiracial polyglot countries don’t work.
American Political History
Jimmy Carter lead Ronald Reagan in the polls 58% to 33% in mid-February 1980. The only state to have voted by mid-February was Iowa, and George H.W. Bush narrowly beat Reagan in the Hawkeye Cauci. Polling a hypothetical race between Reagan and Carter in mid-February was about as useful as teeth on hens, because it was thought that Bush was the front-runner. Too, Jimmy Carter had a Ted Kennedy problem that season, but it was more of an acute rather than a chronic problem. It wasn’t until April 5 that Reagan had won nine of the previous ten primaries and caucuses, a long enough winning streak to make him credible as a Republican nominee in the minds of most people, and Ted Kennedy was laughed out of the Democrat games, such that Reagan-Carter polling was useful. Still, Reagan couldn’t break the low 30s versus Carter, and only broke 40 after the post-convention bounce in July. As late as mid-October 1980, Reagan was only polling at 39%.
John Anderson, the third party candidate in the race that year, polled as high as 24% in late May. His numbers predictably went down as the two-party dynamic heated up in the late summer and fall.
The actual vote? Reagan 50.7%, Carter 41%, Anderson 6.6%.