Middleton Speaks to the National Press Club

21 06 2016

Washington, D.C.

It went something like this:

“First off, slavery.

Second, I hate all the white people in my state who didn’t like what all went down.  If it were up to me, I’d revoke their oxygen consumption privileges.  Unfortunately, I don’t have that power, yet.  And to make matters worse, these people are the constituents of the people who determine how much crucial state funding we get, that being the Missouri General Assembly.  That’s why I had to hire the son of one of my state’s U.S. Senators and his lobbying firm, give him and it enough money to bribe enough state legislators to make sure our state funding wasn’t cut that much if at all.  And with my state government’s non-existent ethics laws, I knew they’d come through.  But it’s also why I had to throw Melissa Clickbait to the wolves on Andy Blunt’s advice, because she was the sacrificial lamb that I had to throw away just so the legislators can go back to their pissed off knuckledragging honky constituents and claim they did something, so that those same knuckledragging honkys don’t notice that their Republican legislators didn’t much cut our budget.  It was her own fault for being so aggressive and public during the protests anyway.

Third, I’m so glad my school’s professors weaponized my black football players to run Tim Wolfe and his budget knife out of town, so I could be an interim college president for my LinkedIn and my CV.”





With or Without

20 06 2016

College Station, Texas

A&M brags about more NAMs in spite of no affirmative action.

How were they able to pull it off?

Embracing the Top 10 Percent Rule

The decision for A&M to avoid considering race was made in 2003 after the Supreme Court ruled that the University of Michigan could use affirmative action in its law school admissions. Before that, Texas universities were bound by a 1996 ruling from the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals that affirmative action was unconstitutional.

The 1996 ruling led to Texas’ Top 10 Percent Rule, which promises automatic admission into public Texas universities for students who rank near the top of their high school’s graduating class. The rule ignores the SAT and other factors, which on average benefit white and Asian students, and was meant to ensure that a certain number of students from the state’s poorer, lower-performing schools can also get into a top public college.

Plain words, affirmative action.

The top ten percent rule that everyone in the top ten percent of their class gets in, whether it’s a none too rigorous ghetto or taco high school, or a difficult white or Asian school.  Meaning that D’Leiysha who was in the 91st percentile of her class at Martin Luther King High in Bell Curve, Texas gets in, while Blake who was in the 89th percentile of his class at this school doesn’t get it.





Stereohype Threat

19 06 2016

New Brunswick, New Jersey

This is the second of a three-part counter-response to a response to a WSJ editorial that the author of the counter-responses co-authored.  All the links are there or in the links themselves if you want to get up to speed.

But I think Dr. Jussim is wasting his time debating over the stereotype threat.

That’s because the stereotype threat not only does not exist, it can’t possibly exist and never could have existed in the climate of the almost century since the Boasian Revolution.

I’ll net it all out for you:  Stereotype threat means that blacks don’t do that well on tests because they have been told that they are innately intellectually inferior, therefore, they don’t bother trying.  (Which begs the question:  Why do they even bother taking the test?)

That’s easy to refute:  When in the conscious lifetimes of everyone reading these words have blacks officially been instructed that they are innately intellectually inferior?  One actually has to go looking for social science research in the racial differences in IQ; the librarians hide it well, and that’s if you can get past the psychological firewall installed against our curiosity; you know, six million and gas chambers and all that jazz.

In reality, blacks are instructed to think that if they don’t do as well on tests as whites, it’s because there’s something wrong with the tests, and that’s of course an excuse that is very easy for them to believe.





It’s Historical Racism Porn Time, Kiddos

18 06 2016

Downtown

SLU Law is all about the affirmative action for “minorities” (read: blacks), because:

“For decades, and I’m talking pre-1950, nonwhites were prohibited from the practice of law (through) being prohibited from bar associations,” Taylor said.

Those real, but unofficial policies to keep the legal profession nearly all white persisted through the Jim Crow era and beyond.

Explain the 66-year gap in your CV, Mr. Narrativemongerer.  It’s 2016, and you say that before 1950, “nonwhites” (read: blacks) were (supposedly) not allowed to practice law.  Well what’s the deal in the 66 years between 1950 and 2016?

Started practicing law in 1933

Started practicing law in 1933

 





Progressive Stack Fall Down Go Boom

15 06 2016

Columbia

I guess the official narrative of zomg guns isn’t working with this crowd.





Shot and Chaser

10 06 2016

McKinney, Texas and Raleigh, North Carolina

tx-val

wake-valedictorian

IDEA: "Valedictorian" could be our new above board pejorative for "illegal alien."





Full Spectrum

10 06 2016

Boston

“World War T.”

Few students are choosing gender-inclusive housing. At Georgia Tech’s Atlanta campus, 42 out of some 4,100 students housed in dorms sought it last year.

One percent.  And mind you this is in a T-friendly environment.

“There are certainly some transgender students for whom it matters a lot but if it’s a gay man whose best friend is a lesbian and they decide they want to live together, this is an option,” said Demere Woolway, director of LGBTQ life at the Baltimore university.

College officials interviewed also emphasized they have no plans to phase out traditional gender-segregated housing.

“We have students … who want to maintain spaces where they are with people who have the same gender identity,” said Elizabeth Lee Agosto, senior associate dean of student affairs at Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire, which has offered gender-inclusive housing since 2007. “It’s important to have the full spectrum.”

I’ve been trying to figure out why L, G and B are so fucking defensive of T, other than the fact that since they’re in the Grand Acronym of alternate behaviors and have an informal mutual defense treaty, all the letters have to come to the defense of any one letter that is under attack.  The problem with that theory is that it’s a one way street:  L, G and B defend T these days, but T doesn’t seem to want to reciprocate; in fact, T not only won’t defend L, but sorta despises it, because they think L is “TERF” (Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist), and T also whines about the “cotton ceiling” of L.  A much better theory is that G defends T because so many G can fathom the possibility that they themselves will become T in the near future, and that a lot of T are ex-G.  Add what I quoted above to it, that the social affairs of L and G are made easier by T-friendly housing arrangements.  To put it crudely, tranny-friendly dorms are also conducive to fags and fag hags that want to shack up.

“It’s important to have the full spectrum.”  That’s right — Everyone needs their safe spaces, except for white cishet goy men.  They, comprising 10% of the student body, are chimping out on campus making life a living hell for the other 90%.

 








Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,797 other followers