Saturday, August 30, 2014

Chocolate Cheesecake

Wrapping up Black Week, I made a vague promise of a women post, which we could call Chocolate Cheesecake. I've written before on the new form of 'passing', which for black men is finding a women who looks white but is just black enough for mom. Sad really but foreseen by old timers. There are attractive black women out there who are not Halle Berry 50-70% white DNA types. Maybe if black men avoided sleeping with 200 pounders, there would be incentive to shed the pounds and improve the pool of black women with nice bodies. Top notch talent like Carla Campbell is out there.

Incredibly high quality
Jamaican born model who was in SI's swimsuit edition. Natural curves, great eyes and full lips plus no hint of european DNA.

Pornography has some pretty black women. An unspoken thing in the porn world is the inversion of norms when it comes to interracial scenes. While the media still worries about the taboo, what they are really focusing on is the taboo of non-black women performing with black males. This is reinforced by IAFD only listing an interracial performance as a non-black with a black. If they truly listed all IR, there would be an unspoken pattern. The more attractive the black female in porn, the higher percentage of scenes she will have with whites. Media does not cover that, but it's real. Clear cut examples exist. Even black feminist performers see it to some degree.

On the porn forums, debates of best natural breasts ever in the industry usually include Audree Jaymes (Bing search her). Amazing body. Looks like a girl on the track team who sprouted DDs after high school. As great as her breasts were, her teeth were just as bad. She was a performer with a short lived career (she married out) who made maybe 25 films and most of them are with whites.

The rest of her pics were NSFW
On lifestyle black male ezines, they'll list best or hottest black chicks in porn. Lacey Duvalle is usually high on that list. She is another with, ahem, many scenes with white talent. The fans notice, and it does bug some black fans who forget porn performers are just filmed hookers. They do it for the money. It irks the bruthas, but it doesn't stop them from watching all the reverse IR they can find. Duvalle's curves are bought but worth every penny.

Hard to find SFW pics of her
Use Bing for image search. Google is filtering things now (even with safesearch off). That might carve a niche for Bing search if they keep it up, "Bing: We Don't Filter Out Porn".

Friday, August 29, 2014

Sports Exception that Proves the Rules

Oh Lordy, the media is gushing about the wicked awesome pitcher at the Little League World Series you just have to watch. Of course you will remember her name forever! Mo'ne! I can't imagine why the sports media is going nuts about her. She was on the cover of Sports Illustrated. Why?




Black, female and who knows maybe she already is a lesbian. That is progressive media BINGO right there. Kind of reminds me of the jokes comics and sportscasters made about the Danny Almonte kid and his city team scaring the little white or foreign kids on other teams. Almonte was a 14 year old who competed as a 12 year old. If you know male growth patterns, you know 14 vs. 12 is a large difference, so his team illegally beat good team after good team because every other game they had a 14 year old, only to lose in the finals to the foreign team because he couldn't pitch due to the "every other game" rule. It was "cool" though watching the city kids win per the media, whereas the Taiwanese teams that used 14 year olds in different years were dirty cheaters. Before the advent of widespread Little League softball programs, it was common to see one girl play in a Little League and occasionally one make it to an All-Star team. Hey, the media has to use the exception to prove nature's rules.


The Decline of New York City Basketball

Grantland had an interesting article on the decline of New York basketball. It is a good fluff read if you like sports, especially basketball and its history. It is an entertaining read. The article explains the decline of NYC as a mecca for basketball as well as a wellspring for talent. The Garden was a palace for basketball whether the Knicks or the Big East tournament. Stars played on the playgrounds. A new amazing point guard came out of NYC like they were off an assembly line. The Grantland article laments this decline and tries to find out why. Think some things are missing in their analysis? Grantland can only skirt around some issues and others it must skip entirely because of the progressive system.

Recognizing the NBA only picks up about 60 guys per year from the whole world would be a simple explanation for the drop in NYC ballplayers. This should not get in the way of good shock hooks for an essay. About 20% of the NBA is foreign born.
This is a pool of talent that was virtually nonexistent 25 years ago. This is going to squeeze out not the best, but the bench warmer or specialist type talent that might have scooped up a NYC player. The idea of NBA player is the end result of a series of steps. This involves a filtered funnel because God forbid any progressive thinks of the thirty steps it takes to get to the NBA (like from infant to practicing surgeon). This article is not going to mention the staggering number of black American aborted since Roe v. Wade. Lebron James's mom was a pregnant teenager. If she gets an abortion like the high percentage of NYC black American teens do, no one knows Lebron because he does not exist. That is the lottery ticket of genetics there for the NBA. How many NBA players have been aborted since the '70s. Can't talk about it.

The article mentions the change in the game from being a city game to a nationwide game with the growth of players from the South and West. The quotations mention strength training and weight-lifting. This actually pushes towards the physical fitness at 13 setting the stage for 7 years later on draft night, which is absurd but par for the norm in today's "upside", "potential", "burst", etc. sports world. Unmentioned is that the game went from being a city and primarily Northeast game to a game all blacks identified as their game. Those boys from the South are black players. Scouting is far more spread out, so there is a national network of scouts picking up guys through the AAU system and not relying on high school competition like days of old. it is kind of like Harvard's ending of their entrance exam and reliance on the SAT combined with a lowering of the pre school pipeline for picking freshmen. It is not hard to see similarities if one wants to think hard enough.


This might be a stretch but look at NYC's population and what NYC's black population went through in the '80s, '90s and even today. The men quoted mention empty playgrounds and empty courts when kids used to shovel courts to play. What if some of it is video games and some of it is safety? Murders started to rise sharply in the '70s and peaked in the early '90s. A 23-33 year old player would've been a kid during the peak crack years. Did NYC lose a future superstar from murder, crime, jail or just the secondary effect of influencing a family to leave or a family to cocoon their child? It is a possibility. Just like NYC's black population being roughly the same it was 35 years ago, but childhood obesity today is far worse than it was in 1979. What if a kid ate himself out of competition? Not the short fat guys, but guys who skyrocketed to 6'4" but ate themselves to 292 pounds have potential. Slice off 10-15% of the black youths out there, and then you have fewer black males to send through the filtered funnel for the NBA.


This is all rather silly. To point out a drop in players from one city of an incredibly young game and even younger league is a bit of a waste of print space. Similar to news media, with the involvement of blacks, there are only so many appropriate reasons one can cite for an issue. The foreign player numbers cut into the black numbers as some foreigners are black foreign born players, so that unsettling feeling of being squeezed (whether Harvard, manual labor or the NBA)  is there for American blacks. Best not ruffle feathers or think beyond idiotic points. The bigger idea is that basketball has grown in breadth of interest globally and NYC has stopped being the center of its earth. That is an interesting enough message that the mandarins of ESPN want to push anyway. There might be a dwindling interest from mainstream America, but by golly, the whole world cares now. Still, this is America, and the focus always has to be on America. This could just have been an article on the decline of basketball's connection to NYC. Similar to Notre Dame football though, when the Knicks bounce back, the cache will be there and it will be buzzing in the Garden.


Thursday, August 28, 2014

Blacks, Let's Make a Deal

Sometimes a problem gets so big that people stop trying to address it. Sometimes a problem is so thorny that even to touch it is to inflict pain. Sometimes you have to cut the Gordian knot. There are rumblings of secession. There are calls for black cops for black neighborhoods. There is always a search for black educators to teach black students. I read earlier in the year a gentleman call for reparations for blacks. We need to right a historical wrong that keeps getting further and further in the rear view mirror. Let's Make a Deal!!!


Before we make a deal, let me mention that reparations of any amount are rather horrible to bring up in our vibrant and diverse nation. What do the 15% of Americans who are Hispanic owe? What do the 5% of Americans who are Asian owe? What does anyone who immigrated after 1865 owe? What do descendants of those who fought and died wearing blue in the Civil War owe? Setting that aside, can we look at the ledger. Smart guys wrote about welfare and what not for why reparations are a bad idea, but let me bring up crime. What are the costs of crime?
Oh what if we just focused on black-white crime gaps? What of the differential in interracial rape that is in the tens of thousands? If each rape has a cost of $110K, that is $1.6 billion a year eating into your request. If the cost of rape is $448K like these researchers believe, then you're running into a $6 bil hit each year. What of murder? At $17 mil per murder and a couple hundred  murders differential per year, that is a couple billion each year. Multiply this over the statistics for the last forty years, and we've wiped away Mr. Coates request. Let's call it even.

The Deal

Money can be spent, and we all know the white devils would somehow find a way to get it back if it were purely greenbacks. Let us concentrate on land like Abe's deal would have been. First we need to locate all 1st and 2nd generation immigrants that identify as black and return them to their homelands. I include 2nd gen immigrants because they should help their homelands. After all, when an immigrant is raised in Maine and nurtured in the sweet, sea breeze all their life and still identifies as a Jamaican for public exposure, we might have a loyalty problem. That will knock the black population number down from 38 million to 33 million. We'd leave prisoners in prison, so that removes another million (we'll return them to you after release). Second, you are Americans, so there's a couple ways we could go about this. Repatriation to African is open, and we'd gladly set up an emigration program to a bribed welcoming nation in West Africa. If the call of Africa is not inviting, we can focus on keeping Americans who have been here centuries in America. We can use the Georgia Plan.


Georgia will be set up as your state. You can rename it as it was named after a white King of England. You can either remain in the union or create your own nation (might want to go "own nation" route to free up economic development). Because evil, racist whites live in Georgia, we will have to redistribute them to different US states (shut up, white Georgians, I know what I am doing). We also want to spare you from evil, racist whites, so we will set up strict border guards and fence around the border so that no white is allowed to stray in and potentially accost or kill your people. Evil whites, stay out. We will also make strict immigration rules to make sure no blacks stray and put themselves in the evil lands outside the state of Georgia. Finally, black businesses employing blacks. Black cops patrolling black neighborhoods. Black politicians everywhere. Black doctors, black nurses, black newscasters, black reporters, black teachers, black accountants, etc. No more white meddling. Think of how awesome that is.

Now I know some liberals might not want this state to happen. They are doubting you and you better show them! They are just scared because by placing 30 million blacks in one state only, they would lose every national election going forward. Why? Well all blacks would be concentrated in one state removing the swing difference in many states, plus we'd now have millions of whites to distribute to swing states. How many non-swing states could we make securely rightist? That could make continuing your favorite federal government programs untenable in the future. Better to not leave your destiny and your community in the hands of evil, white America (forget Hispanics and Asians). Make Georgia a separate nation. The world will be so proud. Freedom from evil, white privilege. Freedom from evil, white systemic racism. Freedom to make a nation of your own. The chance to create and control your destiny.


I have seen the racial dot map. Blacks generally live in major metropolitan areas and the South. Blacks should be angling for secession and emigration into blue states with those nice, progressive whites to avoid scary, racist whites. It would be better than competing with the Hispanics and suffering tribal warfare non-stop. No money to compete with the Asians and whites, and a lower, working class foe who exhibits tribal solidarity, family formation and lower rates of social dysfunction does not make a happy future. If secession does not come, this Georgia Plan is going to look fantastic in hindsight.

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

Gentrification Research Results Perplexes Academics

Gentrification is such a nice, hot phrase for liberals to enjoy while simultaneously decry for ruining city slum authenticity. It is not like rich conservatives are gentrifying those areas. Simple reviews of vote history in elections by census tract can show the media progressives how they are just attacking the hands that pay for them. Academia even has a nice myopia or selective amnesia about gentrification. How else can one explain this piece of work.

Immediately, the writer does not notice the circumstances of recent decades where the gentrifying cities suffered sharp declines ans white flight qhile being followed by the FIRE economy real estate bubble. The Sun Belt cities had no gentrification because they experienced their growth in the post-WW2 era as those old, bordering bodoes of water experienced decline. Sun Belt cities had no zoning law red tape and cheap land. Rust Belt cities held on a bit longer due to manufacturing sticking around as an economic force longer there than in the older port cities. For liberals who celebrate diversity, they miss diversity of economics, history and land.

Comedy continues as the writers note research finding that gentrification is very dependent on the percent of black inhabitants with 40% a magical line. It might not just be "explicit racism" but other factors. Here is an idea: maybe it is crime statistics for the area. Maybe there is a sweet spot where real estate values are depressed by the crime and blight in the area but the crime and blight might be more manageable with an increased poloce presence. Do black gangs operate in 65% black neighborhoods but have less of a footprint in 30% black neighborhoods? Just asking before I label gentrification scouts racists.

The researchers find that gentrification does not have spillover effects for bordering neighborhoods. Anyone who has walked in a major Northeastern city knows this. It is an archipelago one navigates for safe zones. These academics and the writer have the foolish mindset that if you paint the cage pink, the pit bull will change. The idea inserting people with wealth into an area will help surrounding areas is an ancient one from the bygone era of ethnic city neighborhoods. Neighbors that all sent kids to the same schools, ate the same ethnic foods, went to the church and were a connected unit. Twenty first century gentrification is made up by wealthy or adventurous pepple who love the architecture, the location, the idea of living in the city or returning. There is no connection because it brings the atomized suburban experience to the city.

Looking at gentrification as an economic and lifestyle selection on the part of big money developers and urban, knowledge workers strips the stupidity from these academics' assumptions. This is not organic neighborhood building with a bonding drive. It is a homo economicus decision for one's lifestyle. It is about money, their money. If the natives do not adjust or do not feel the financial benefits, then tough, sell and move out. Gentrification is not evil amd it is not a solution to improving the plight of the urban poor. A return to the old neighborhoods in American cities is a fantasy. It might not improve the lives of the urban underclass but gentrification at least improves the quality and utility of the prime real estate in our knowledge economy hubs.

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

Narrow the Inequality Gap by Just Graduating High School

We here about inequality all of the time now. Unemployment, weak job growth and stagnant wage growth generally out of focus because it makes the president look bad. The deeper look is that it would make our FIRE economy system look bad, so we definitely do not want to talk about it. A personal favorite the last week or so has been for the media to discuss inequality with regards to the events in Ferguson, Missouri. Inequality is the root of all evil. With the steady drumbeat of the media, I wonder what the progressive apparatchiks have in store for us from a policy standpoint to solve this. The media loves to point the black white income gap, never the wider black-Asian gap or even wider black-Jewish gap, but black-white so whites can feel guilty and vote correctly. The media can never own up to a simple way to close this gap because it reveals a horror story about America. Blacks simply need to graduate high school at higher rates.

We can brush aside immigration (negative effect) and broken families (negative effect) and just focus on
graduation rates. Per the wonderful Schott Foundation, one can get a glimpse of the true graduation rate for black males. Sadly, the foundation is beating the drum on disparate impact of school suspensions like the rest of progressive institutions. With their data in hand, the hidden truth is revealed. The percent of black boys that enter 9th grade who then received a regular diploma after four years is 52%. This is up from 42% since 2002. This 52% is a first for cracking the 50% line since tracking it. Despite the straight line drawing in their website's report, older data they used to release showed how that number bounced between 42-48% through the decade. The foundation's director says it is not flaws in the students but neglect by the government policy-makers and officials. Whatever that means, since black girls graduate at higher rates in the same school districts (similar to the white male-female differential). If you have a black friend who graduated high school, he is one of the good half. Now think of how all the black guys you know have graduated high school and ponder the out of sight underclass. Those guys are not around you, and you do not want them around with the other issues that follow them.

This has knock on effects that the media does not want to consider as part of the inequality debate. It is pretty easy to look at annual salary data and see that, on average, high school drop outs make roughly $10,000 less than high school graduates per year who make less than college graduates. This is another filtered funnel the media and progressives will not cite. You cannot close an income or wealth inequality gap if someone dropped out of high school fifteen years earlier. Never finish high school and magically, there are a lot of jobs you cannot get nor fields where you can advance. This is not access to college and more education. This is about basic high school completion, which has been "dumbed down" as much as possible by our education policy-makers. The problem is being portrayed as a lack of engagement and evil school suspensions, because God forbid anyone be accountable for their problem. If the kid has a tough home, we cannot cite how that broken home may be the result of government social welfare incentives or higher rates of dysfunction in certain communities.

This is a horror story. One that will not be fixed with all the government programs in the world. Increase the number of two parent homes and the graduation rate might go up. That would require removing perverse government incentives that foster single moms and a matriarchal structure for a society. Two parents do not solve everything, but that situation makes parenting easier. We cannot change those incentives because that's the gimmedats formula for leftist electoral success as well as lost jobs for the social workers of America. It comes back to finishing high school. It goes back to homes and families. These are issues we will not address properly. In the eyes of our progressive overlords, it will be much easier and better to install more government programs, more redistribution and more fairy tale slogans than to face reality.

Monday, August 25, 2014

Ethnic Cleansing of a Black Stronghold

Oh the fun one can have with newspaper archives. Historians, like the communist Howard Zinn, like to say that the ballot box has been used as a relief valve for social duress. That might work within a civilized society with a proper execution of the rule of law. It might work with rulers aligned to the area they administer. It does not happen in 21st century America. As America's rulers continue to push the multicultural line, it might be best to review an example of ethnic cleansing in the heart of vibrancy: southern California. It might come as a shock to rap historians but the city of Compton (bow wow wow), has switched from a black stronghold to a Hispanic redoubt with wombs, horrible methods and tribal solidarity.

Compton was a black city with national exposure thanks to early '90s rap music. Dr. Dre, Ice Cube, Eazy-E and transplant Snoop Dogg rapped often about the mean streets of Compton. From a young G's perspective, it was a place where black boys become men and a veritable school of hard knocks. With Hispanic immigration in the 1990s, the Mexicans creeping north of the border found cheap real estate in Compton. They were fruitful and multiplied in Compton, but as the LA Times pointed out in 1998, they were still on the outside looking in politically. They were being excluded from power. Black leaders told them to go get the votes, and then maybe they could enjoy some of the leadership positions. Reading the Times report, there is a feeling that Southern California communities will find a way to share power and work together, it just needs time. Hispanics and blacks got along for the most part per the Times. This is a bit disingenuous because the Times has to play dumb about how the blacks ran whites out of neighborhoods and ascended to power in certain neighborhoods. Mexicans decided to take a similar route but slightly different.

Flash forward to 2013, the LA Times is running articles on Latino gangs terrorizing black residents in Compton. Hispanics now make up 65% of residents. Yes, the black Compton black rapper Kendrick Lamar raps about is a fantasy. Latinos did not bother to peacefully assemble voters, per the guidance of black leaders. instead, they decided to bring in the numbers and terrorize the other tribe. The Times is very detailed with the official ways the Latinos scare away blacks.


The attackers left, but a half-hour later a crowd of as many as 20 people stood on the lawn yelling threats and epithets. A beer bottle crashed through the living room window as the youngsters watched in horror."They were scared if they called the sheriff they'd be killed," Westin said. "So they called their mom, who called the Sheriff's Department."


I guess "snitches get stitches" is only acceptable when blacks use it to terrorize their own neighborhoods. The Times also thinks they can say the Compton homes were "well maintained" by blacks two decades ago. Not buying it as Snoop and Dre told me Compton was da mean streetz. I dislike anyone being terrorized by neighbors for simply being different, but it is incredibly hard for me to be sympathetic to an extended group (blacks) who have engaged in similar if not worse ways of chasing other people out of neighborhoods. Change black to white and Latino to black, and those instances of terrorizing are the same as in any neighborhood that has experienced white flight. The press and cops were quick to say none of the terrorized were connected to gangs. Yes, same goes for the millions of whites who fled cities after World War Two. The methods are not as organized and overt, but robbing your white neighbors and intimidating them is the same problem as described here.

The tragic part of this is found in statements by a city council member. "We need to address these issues," she said. "Because if they continue to fester like this, then it can spread to the whole city." Sorry, council member, but this is what happens across America when these two groups collide. The Times is silent on the black on brown crime that has gone on for decades combined with blacks freezing out Hispanics in the past. Hispanics now have the numbers, and score slightly better on almost every socioeconomic indicator. LA is ground zero but Hispanics now outnumber blacks in Chicago's public school system. Chicago has seen Mexican gangs move in, chip away at black territory, and then watch as they exhibit greater ethnic solidarity and let the black gangs gun each other down. Blacks have been on the losing end. This is horrible and an example of ethnic cleansing. As I wrote before on this very article, Hispanics move into those areas due to cheap rent or property, have nowhere to economically escape to, and they bring machetes and guns for retaliation.


The problem that blacks face is lack of capital and poor family foundations. When whites flee an area, they move 10 minutes further away and rebuild. On Indianapolis' Northside, one can witness what has happened to Lawrence Townships' schools and the decline creep northward and just drive ten minutes north to Fishers and see the gleaming new developments built after 1995. Blacks are not known for wealth or working capital. Middle class whites have been abandoning California, and the wealthy whites have their financial apartheid set up, so where oh where can they go? There is also another downside to the black community, and that is the moment anyone gets status or money in the community, they bail on their people. Nino Brown gave turkeys out at Thanksgiving, but your average black millionaire is hightailing it out of the hood. The article ends with the sad message that a man was shot for his skin color. This is ethnic cleansing, and only acceptable to discuss in the media because blacks are the victims. This is not the beginning nor is it the end, but it is a small tale in the diversity + proximity = war tale. The "no majority America of 2050" looks scarier by the day. 

Sunday, August 24, 2014

Ferguson + Blacks' Trapped Status

Dear readers (all 50 of you), normally I post Mon-Tues on subjects, themes or ideas that are related, then the rest of the week is a free for all. With the media created circus and fake conversation on race spawned by events in Ferguson, I thought I'd devote a week to American blacks. I've written about blacks randomly, and through my black acquaintances feel they are in a mess partly due to history, partly of their own making, and partly due to elite manipulation and perverse incentive mechanisms. This is post one. I'll hit my normal topics politics, recent history, sports, stupidity in the media and academia, women (Fri-Sat cheesecake), etc. Something different to spice up the Summer.

*********************************************************** 

I have not written about the Ferguson rioting, looting, police reaction, media circus because we all should let the facts come out first. Steve Sailer and Handle have provided good commentary on the media event of the summer. Of course this looks like Trayvon the sequel, because it is just another outrage cycle event. There will be another, and another and another. This is an emotional laxative for blacks  who as a collective are caught in a trap where their only allies (elite leftist whites) use them for votes to gain power but live far away and watch blacks drop further behind. Note some differences this time though in the outrage cycle. Al Sharpton is asking for protesters to avoid violence. He did not do that at Freddie's Fashion Mart. No one is buying this stuff except true believers on the left and those who need this to work the system. Even Obama's reaction is far different. Mike Brown isn't his son like Trayvon was. Do you feel the tightening of black leader sphincters? Why are there even national black leaders? As Jim Brown said, if there were more men in the home being leaders for their families, there would be no need for a national leader. This episode reveals, if anything, the sad trap that blacks find themselves in on a socioeconomic and political level in America.

No one in the media is touching Ferguson's history because it would reveal the black hot potato and locust effect other cities and inner suburbs have experienced. Ferguson was a commuter community even as far back as the 19th century. It was turned into a charter city in 1954 along with some other suburbs of St. Louis as whites fled the city and those communities wanted to protect themselves. St. Louis, and the Federal government, decided to move the poor of St. Louis to the Pruitt-Igoe projects. Those projects were started with high hopes in 1950 and completed in 1954. The idea was that the poor housing stock and decaying old homes enabled and fostered crime. Move those people to clean, new facilities and everything would improve. They were intended to house whites and blacks with a mix of families and young, urban professionals. It did not work out that way. How fast did the projects devolve into ruin? By 1972, the apartment buildings were demolished. The Soviets still have some of their projects up. These lasted less than two decades. The city has recently engaged in gentrification, which pushed poorer residents out to cheaper suburbs. This is why whites dropped from 73% of Ferguson to roughly 30% in just twenty years. Where do those blacks come from, and is it just the same reshuffling of working class-underclass blacks St. Louis has been doing for seventy five years? Shhh, do not bring this up media.

Blacks themselves have caught on to the game and are nervous. Comics have figured out how the gays have taken over for the left's pet group. Just call gay marriage a civil right around a black coworker. The under-reported Hispanic-black race war does not seem to be working out in the blacks' favor. The Obamas are not inspiring a rush to nuptials or lowering of the illegitimacy rate. This Ferguson episode shows some things that no one will discuss. Here is one of the young men going to college, with a father, and he still was robbing stores, pushing around people and attacking police officers. He was sucked into the cultural thug effect. Even our half-black, raised exclusively by whites and Asians president feels the need to blacken up. That is why he was shot. If he had acted like the fairy tale "hands up, don't shoot", he'd be alive. This is not Alabama in 1945 or Boston in 1975. Looking at Officer's situation and Zimmerman's before him, no white wants to be the Mississippi Burning candidate of the year.


Blacks cannot even protest like they used to. Gone are the suits, Sunday dresses and slow but proud singing. Protests turn to riots and peaceful marchers look like looters from the get go. This actually hurts the left as burning cities inspires law and order backlash, and God forbid some whites get nudged out of their carbohydrates and entertainment stupor. Riots are not even what they used to be, as the police are armed and supplied for anything. Did Trayvon mark a turning point? Probably, but the Duke Lacrosse situation might have been the start. Everyone on the left looked like a clown for that, and gave the alternative media some spirit. Did the counterweight media already anticipate the Trayvoning of Mike Brown and move quickly? Yes. No little kiddie pictures released this time. The police were involved here, and smartly gave the Feds the finger. It is one week in, and the jokes about six autopsies, the 300 lb "boy", and other things have started. If not for the Jews and agnostic Protestants in the media taking the protestors' side, no one would care but since only 25% of whites are, can the apathy get worse (Hispanics care less so than even whites)?

Here's the secret behind this sad state of affairs. They took the handouts first, just as LBJ expected, and were bought cheaper and earlier (don't worry, "they" buy us all eventually). Blacks did not think long term and slid right to voting 90% for Democrats. Every incentive, every policy initiative, and every media project is to maintain that blind obedience. You can believe they vote or not, because just by registering they get into the "vote reservoir" and participation can be geared up or down as the Democrats' need per state or nationally for POTUS. Had the blacks stayed at say 70% and oscillated 15% per election, they would see much more action from either side (ex: 85% in high year like '08 Obama, maybe 55% in a high GOP year like '02). Democrats know they are a sure thing, so they only need to keep welfare flowing and make work jobs alive. No cares about social dysfunction or crime victimization in the community. Just show up for a photo-op with shirt sleeves rolled up to the elbow. The GOP can write them off because they are not getting traction. No core problems will get addressed since the dysfunction creates more need for government programs (education & social work) or law & order (construction & prison contracts), helping either side.

The blacks are caught in a bind, and politically the left still needs that 90%. With control of the media, the GOP will never chip it down to 66%. Look at exit poll data (even in Obama years). If 90% turns to 66% in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida and in some years Minnesota and Wisconsin, they have a huge problem (2004 becomes a W landslide). It has turned out good for blacks, right? Any socioeconomic measure improved since 1964? Any measure, compared to fifty years ago, that is improving or anyone is truly addressing? No, and no one will care. Eventually Jim Crow and apartheid will find a way into daily life, using progressive word cloaking and real estate pricing to make it happen. I'm sorry blacks. Not for anything I or my people are accused of doing today, but for your state of affairs. Hispanics outnumber you by 10 million, Asians flex their political muscles in California, and your buddies in Congress still want more of them to come here and compete against you. What privilege do "English as a foreign language" immigrants have over blacks? It may be a struggle now, but it will get worse.

Thursday, August 21, 2014

Summer Skirt Break

It has been a weird summer hasn't it? We don't have shark stories or normal lame-o filler articles that the media spends time on rather than engage in deep dives or investigative reports. This summer is full of Bond villains like ISIS, coups in Thailand, Israelis and Palestinians fighting (again, shocking), blacks rioting over a criminal who attacked a cop, (again, shocking) Russia and China outmaneuvering the US, Germany inching towards Russia, Pakistan a mess, and an eeeeeeee-bola outbreak the Africans cannot control. The summer has also been oddly cool, outside the drought in California, and my lunch breaks have been spent outdoors enjoying the nice 75 degree weather. I have noticed a ton of women wearing skirts and summer dresses. Seems more than normal this summer or maybe it is just cooler so more are eating lunch outdoors. Try as they might, the feminists cannot kill the urge for women to feel sexy.

I'm a people watcher. I'm a girl watcher. The Internet is a cornucopia in that regard. It's the selfie society. For some cheesecake on this Friday (technically tomorrow), I thought I'd showcase two wonderful models (former) that you can easily Google and find a lot of NSFW and SFW pictures. A couple decades ago when glamour models had some cache and could be on those Pay Per View Playboy specials, these two would have been rolling in the dough. If you are old enough to remember, they were 55 minute specials that were made for Scramblevision viewing ("Guys, it gets clear 36 minutes into it for 2 minutes!"). They both do a great sexy, serious look and have great smiles. If a model cannot do the sexy serious look, they just have her smile. Go back to my American Pie post and take note of the four actresses. Happy Friday!

The blond is Ancilla Tilia from the Netherlands. She is one of those women who can wear her hair any color and look great. She did glamour and latex modeling. 




The best way I'd describe her is you know how the media and bros describe how hot Scarlett Johansson is? That is how Ancilla Tilia looks. Curves in the right places and amazing symmetry. Does media stuff now, and still looks awesome.


 The brunette is Katie Fey or Eugenia Diordiychuk. Ukrainian model who Google will return a banquet of NSFW images. She might look familiar if you check our American Apparel advertisements. 
 
It was very difficult finding any pictures of her in clothing. Phenomenal body. Gorgeous woman.
 
 
It's Summer. Get out. Not all is lost, just the broken world around you. Build anew. There are hot women to meet.

Wednesday, August 20, 2014

NY Times Misses the ISIS Point, Rally the Sunnis!

The NY Times has a fantastic piece out about ISIS and Al-Bagdhadi. It is a tremendous look at the myths that are woven around this man. It is also a steady attack on how ISIS and their dear leader are both residue of the American foreign policy and military intervention in the Middle East. This is red meat for its readers. It is also selective avoidance to control the ignorance of its well informed readers. The NY Times does not want to admit it nor even let it be up for debate, but there are diversity, multicultural and religious lessons in ISIS that no liberal wants to touch. ISIS has taken a broken and beaten back group (Iraqi Sunnis) and given them something to rally around, something to fight for and an outlet to channel their energy that cuts along religious and ethnic lines.

ISIS is a terror organization, but one that is pretty well put together with powerpoint presentations, quarterly reports, and other Bond villain ideas. They operate oil and gas facilities to keep revenue up. They think of non-confrontational ways to have leverage like controlling a dam and threatening to drown Baghdad. They have taken the Caliphate 2.0 concept from Al-Qaeda and actually claimed one. It is a Sunni organization. This is not pan-Arab nor pan-Islam. They kill those who do not convert and attack groups that are not Sunni Arabs. Kurds might be Sunni but it does not matter. Shias might be Arab but are not Sunni. This is tribal warfare with basics of you are either one of us or one of them. The NY Times avoids discussing this instead to harp on the US policy moves that led to such a figure.

The Sunni Arabs go from ruling the region in 2002 to the losers of a civil war 2006 to the main antagonists of a bribe or kill policy (the Iraq Surge) to a broken beaten down minority pushed around, hunted down and squeezed by the central government run by the ethnic majority they used to dominate. Once the US forces all left Iraq, the government security forces became a Shia unit to harass and kill Sunnis. That sounds like a depressed group looking for any positives and primed for a leader. ISIS is nuts and disliked by Sunnis who give sound bites to foreign reporters as they leave battle zones, but check the NY Times article for details. They incorporated old Baath regime generals and leaders. The leadership delegated powers to different groups. The jihdais complain he relies on Baathists too much. Look at the map of where they control, and it shows ISIS controlling ethnic Sunni areas and fighting at the edges of other groups and areas held tighter by autocrats. It is a tribal unit. It has a goal. Proclaiming an independent state as the Caliphate, while sounding bonkers to Westerners, has a strong appeal to Muslims, especially Sunni Muslims in Iraq beaten down the last few years by Shias. ISIS is also winning. The Arabs, and most humans, are known to pick the strong horse and follow the hot hand.

The Times will avoid this rally around the tribe effect because it is an unpleasant reality of the world that globalist, multicultural pushing institutions like the Times doe not want to give any attention. If the Times were honest, they would label him the public face of the fighting front of the Sunnis against the Shias. (We are seeing it right now to a lesser degree in America with the latest dead black criminal turned martyr political ritual.) It is not hard to look around the globe and question the viability of liberal democracy or even nation states themselves. Catalonia? Scotland? Ukraine? The Times would not entertain the idea or even want its readers to entertain the idea of different models, but as history moves and the world changes alternative forms of unification should be explored and debated. While barbaric in their practices, the glue made from ethnic and religious identification and unity exhibited by ISIS and those who are supporting them directly and indirectly should not be excluded from any discussion.

Tuesday, August 19, 2014

Ebola Assignment

Long term stories are not our media's strong suit. Fukushima would have been a tremendous long term deep analysis event if the media and its public had the attention span. Same thing applies to the 2008 American financial crisis. Right now, we are seeing this with the ebola coverage. The body count and death toll are headline attention grabbers, but it might be good to do some actual investigating. Some ebola questions that the media could put together for a primer article for us unenlightened.

What is the incubation period of this strain of the virus (normal = 21 days)?
What is the transmission profile of this version of the virus?
Why has this outbreak had a low death percentage compared to others?
Why are health workers getting it if they are covered in hazmat suits?
Why is the warning that you could catch it from someone in the same room if this is only transmitted through bodily fluids?
Why did we bring back the Americans infected to US shores if we have countless military bases across the globe?
Why have flights not been stopped from nations with outbreaks?
Why have flights from nations with outbreaks not been sent through automatic quarantines?
Are these nations accepting any flights from the Middle East? (Let's think of who might want to be exposed and spread it. Remember ISIS thinks like a Bond villain organization.)
Death toll steadily climbing, what are the reasons that ebola is not burning itself out like normal?
Are we not stopping flights because it might hurt the global economy?
Any thought to an International organization stepping in to tighten up and assist with the leaky quarantine?
How long does the world let West African nations fail at commanding any sense of order to contain the virus?

With the lack of awareness of a life threatening deadly virus killing Africans' family and friends yet Africans do not change behaviors or leave bodies out, how much more of this equality garbage are we going to be force fed?

I'm sure the crack reporters you have in Missouri right now would love to be surrounded by other swarms of looting people of West African descent. Ezra Klein, Chris Hayes and Matt Yglesias, your tickets are waiting at the gate.

Monday, August 18, 2014

When Nixon and Moynihan Almost Revolutionized Welfare

Everything does feel broken. Worse than that, everything feels broken but it feels that those in power like it that way and do not wish to fix it. The schemes for gain are in their favor, and solutions always pay off a donor. Threading "winner take all" economics with corrupt crony politics, we have big money married to big politics looting the public treasury and not reforming the FIRE economy casino. Politics feels like a terrible pissing contest now with focus on winning and who will win next the main obsession. Can you name anything the Congress of '13 and '14 has done? We also have a president who cannot be bothered to address anything nor work with the opposition held Congress he has. Even the media is wondering if this is the end of liberal democracy. It was not always like this. In fact, we sometimes saw politicians reach across the aisle to grab the best people to attack a problem in the best manner. A unique approach and one not seen since was the duo of President Nixon and domestic policy advisor, and future US Senator, Daniel Patrick Moynihan.

Moynihan and Nixon were political opposites with Moynihan a liberal policy wonk who slipped between government and academia while Nixon was a center-right politician. As noted in Ehrlichman's book Witness to Power, it was a bit of a shock that Nixon tapped Moynihan to be a domestic policy advisor. As Ehrlichman notes, "Bob Finch persuaded Nixon that the problems of the time required Moynihan" (Witness to Power). Moynihan's team proved to be an energetic group of young liberals that pushed Nixon and his conservative advisors. In the fall of 1969, they promoted Moynihan to a cabinet level to remove him from "operations, and into free-wheeling idea-generating" (The Haldeman Diaries). Moynihan's big push was to "get rid of things that don't work and try to build up the few that do"(The Haldeman Diaries). The cities were falling apart and there was no money. Almost all proposals submitted by Moynihan's team had to be scrapped because money was so tight. This was also a different time where with the gold standard and international moves going on, the US was under pressure from foreign creditors and oil producers about expenditures that had run wild all through the 1960s. The perplexing problem the Nixon had to tackle was how to reform the welfare system as he had campaigned on, but how to do it in a manner that was soft in delivery, did not increase the deficit and was acceptable to the Democrat majority in Congress. Moynihan and Nixon put together a  Family Assistance Plan (F.A.P.) that acted as a universal basic income.

The Moynihan-Nixon F.A.P. was a plan to stop the programs of LBJ's Great Society but keep the money flowing. As Ehrlichman notes, the programs often are ways to employ Yale grads with guilty consciences. Reduce all of the administration, the paperwork and the make work projects and just cut the checks. While conservative advisor Arthur Burns wanted to stop the programs entirely to stop taxing a blue collar worker to send money to a black mom to have more kids, while per Ehrlichman Moynihan argued that the administration should "cut out the social workers (who were mostly Yale graduates with pangs of conscience) who pandered to black malingerers. Just send the entitled poor a check each month... and that blue collar worker would begin to feel better". There were two important changes to the welfare program as it forced work incentives (workfare) and did not require the "absence of a man" in the household. The goal was through forcing work or work training that it would eventually get more people off of the dole. The other change was drawing on the report that Moynihan famously put together years earlier for LBJ about the nature of black families. The key problem there was the matriarchal structure of many black homes, and the idea of welfare being paid only to single mothers exacerbated the issue. This was a policy intending to correct prior mistakes. It was designed to be efficient.


This is where things get thorny, and pundits lob racist smears at Nixon. It is used even today. Ehrlichman notes that Nixon believed it was the right thing to try to help blacks but that they would never achieve parity because of genetic problems that not "all the Federal money and programs we could devise could not change the fact" (Witness to Power). A particular moment is framed as Nixon as a horrible racist, when he is really trying to express how the poverty issue had become a race issue that no one could discuss. In April of '69, Haldeman records in his diary,
Got into a deep discussion of welfare... President emphasized that you have to face the fact that the whole problem is really the blacks. The key is to devise a system that recognizes this while not appearing to. Problem with overall welfare plan is that it forces poor whites into same position as blacks. Feels we have to get rid of the veil of hypocrisy and guilt and face reality. Pointed out that there has never in history been an adequate black nation, and they are the only race of which this is true. Says Africa is hopeless, the worst there is Liberia, which we built.


This is a passage cited from a 700 page book to show how evil and racist Nixon was. What is left unspoken is a forty year view of Africa in hindsight, and the unmentionable of social welfare usage disparity between races in America. Nixon was pointing out that even in 1969, politicians and policy makers had to recognize and address a situation without ever mentioning it openly. We have not had frank social policy conversations in decades.

The Nixon-Moynihan F.A.P. rolled out with near universal support. It breezed through the House, but stalled in the Senate. The odd combination of Nixon-Moynihan was checked in place by an even odder coalition of very conservative Senators and very liberal organizations and interests. As the NY Times reports in a '73 book review of Moynihan's post-mortem of the failure of the program, some of the worst enemies were liberals. It was not enough money, it was worse than some Northern state programs, and it required people to work. The review notes that Moynihan goes hard after liberals, blaming them for F.A.P.'s demise. The review notes that organized poor won out over doing the better thing, and the reviewers argue in favor of organized interests over unorganized interests even if the organized are a smaller number. This is the NY Times so tiny organized groups are acceptable if properly liberal. The NY Times review was written by two Columbia professors of economics and law, so skewering the program was job number one and trying to blame conservatives was number two. 


Imagine few social workers and straight cash programs that could be easily adjusted due to changing circumstances. No cadre of do gooder single 40 something women on your tax dollar. This essay is not to discuss the projects merits or simply to discuss it because I would take this over our inefficient social welfare system. What stands out much more today is how a conservative president worked with a liberal advisor to address a problem that was made worse by government policies. It is about Nixon and Moynihan working together for a positive policy change. Good governance was the desired goal. An American government had to focus on watching expenses. Moynihan was promoted to a Cabinet level position, and became a well trusted advisor to Nixon. It is from another time but feels like another world. Who was the last opposing party advisor taken in close to a president? Bill Cohen and Robert Gates have been Republican secretaries of defense for Democrat presidents. Considering Gates speeches and interviews since leaving the Obama administration, Gates did not appear to have the intimacy with Obama that Moynihan and Nixon shared. The game has changed. Our system has evolved or devolved however you want to look at it. Deficits do not matter. Reform is not reform, just new regulations and handouts to the organized. Both political parties have their academic policy wonks funded by foundations and corporations to recommend programs and initiatives that favor them. We have long moved beyond the point of good governance and positive policies. 

Sunday, August 17, 2014

Hidden History: The Last Supreme Court Nominees Discriminated Against

A statement this week by President Obama centered around his thought that he would get to appoint one more Supreme Coourt justice. Are there any firsts and unprecedented appointments left? An Asian justice? An openly gay justice? A justice that does not speak English? America is running out of firsts. The press loves to spotlight firsts. For the Supreme Court, the first Catholic was in the mid 1800s, first Jew was a century ago, first black was two generations ago, and we recently had our first Hispanic. Hurrah for progress! No one ever talks about lasts or even in our victim culture, last instances of discrimination. The last group barred from joining the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) was the bloc known as Southern, white men.

Supreme Court presidential nominations have had few outright rejections in its history. The president would nominate, the ABA gives its advice beforehand, and the Senate normally confirms. A change occurred in the 20th century with the rise of voting blocs as John J. Parker's nomination failed by one vote due to his attitude towards labor and the newly formed NAACP's agitation. Eisenhower made appointments during the a Congressional recess. Once the progressive takeover of the machinery of the Federal government was complete, the problem turned into exerting control of the court system. The activist Warren court became a fundraising gold mine for the right as hocus pocus rights were discovered. Even the Burger Court found a way to twist the 14th Amendment for illegitimate kids. Before the famous Borking incident that birthed a political atmosphere for nominations thanks to Senator Ted Kennedy, conservative Mephistopheles himself, Justice Antonin Scalia, was confirmed 98-0. Nominations were political, but not as overtly caustic as now. Incidents always involve politics (increasingly affecting lower court appointments with eyes on future SCOTUS potential), but the Senatorial blockade of Southern white men in '69-'70 was special.

President Nixon came to power in '69, and realized with most of the government machine controlled by the left, a way to influence America for a long period was through a "Nixon Court". Per Ehrlichman's book, he was looking for strict constructionists, with no racial or ethnic slots who would come from meat and potatoes law schools. Not the Ivy League and "above all, not the Northeast" (Ehrlichman, Witness to Power). This fed into Nixon's '68 campaign on law and order, with moves to push the SCOTUS away from it's liberal, activist Warren behavior that many associated with the unraveling in process in America. When Nixon arrived in the Oval Office, he had the Chief Justice slot to fill, and fortuitously, Justice Abe Fortas was forced to resign due to ethics scandals that mushroomed from initial investigations as he was originally to be raised to Chief. This was a immediate and unique opportunity for Nixon to change America's political course and for far beyond his four to eight years in office.

With two slots, Nixon, ever the political animal, picked Warren Burger for Chief Justice who Nixon said "had Burger's promise that Burger would retire before Nixon did so Nixon could appoint another, younger Chief Justice" (Ehrlichman, Witness to Power). Nixon would banter with his inner circle about possibilities. Politically, they would be strict constructionists, but he understood the identity group bingo game of American politics. He wanted Catholics, women, and Southerners. A problem with female nominees, pointed out by his inner circle and never understood by the press, is that the difficulty in nominating a woman in 1970 or even 1980 started with the lack of women at top flight law schools twenty five years earlier to work their way up the legal ladder. Apply this to anything prestigious, and the left disregards the filtered funnel concept. Nixon joked about Jewell LaFontant because she was black and a woman, to which he added that it was "too bad she isn't Jewish" (Witness to Power). Nixon did have a Jewish legal supporter, Rita Hauser, whom he considered for SCOTUS. Hauser made the mistake of saying there were no Constitutional prohibitions for same-sex marriage. Nixon remarked, "Did you read that? There goes a Supreme Court Justice! I can't go that far; that's the year 2000! Negroes [and whites], okay. But that's too far!" (Ehrlichman, Witness to Power) In April of '69 in order to help Nixon, Warren Burger created a list of potential nominees to suit Nixon's quest. After Burger's confirmation, Nixon first nominated a strict constructionist from the South, Clement Haynsworth, to fill the open Associate slot.

Clement Haynsworth was a sitting judge on the Fourth Circuit of Appeals from South Carolina. He spoke slowly and deliberately with a Southern drawl. His ascension to the Court would be a great signal for Nixon to the South to help with 1972. While Nixon's team saw the South as a secure area for '72, they were going to approach desegregation delicately, keep an eye on how hard they pushed the South and focus on ethnics and Northern union voters for '72. The Civil Rights crusade and subsequent formalized mechanisms for forced integration made race a huge concern for Nixon in his first term. Like gay rights today, any black issue was a club used by the left in political battles. Throughout 1969 and 1970, Nixon's team was confronted with riots in cities so often that thankfully the outgoing LBJ administration had faced the same problem and left behind the stacks of papers and formal agreements to handle anything. The actual implementation of the Civil Rights crusade's victory vote was left to be implemented and created a need for sweeping away the old guard.

The Haynsworth nomination put this on display. Haynsworth was attacked immediately for conflicts of interest that were never proved, for being a racist, and for being anti-labor. In Nixon's memoirs, he cites the simple anger of the left for what Haynsworth believes, which was not a problem when he was nominated thirteen years earlier to the Appeals Court, and writes,
Civil rights organizations immediately called Haynsworth a racist; one group said he was a "laundered segregationist". George Meany claimed that his record was anti-labor. The press picked up these themes and played daily variations on them. Soon the pack mentality took hold in Washington. Organized interest groups went to work, and letter and phone campaigns began putting pressure on the Senate.
Haynsworth was defeated despite no inappropriate behavior. Haynsworth was a Harvard graduate. Haynsworth was also a Southern white male. Haldeman writes in his diaries that it was not Haynsworth's abilities. It was "a combination of reaction against the Fortas matter, plus a strong anti-Southern move, plus pure partisan politics" (Haldeman, The Haldeman Diaries). Haynsworth's nomination was voted down, and he continued to serve elsewhere for many more years.

Nixon was not done trying to nominate a strict constructionist, white Southerner; not a black from the South like Marshall whom the Senate, held by Democrats with Rockefeller GOP help, would support. Nixon then nominated G. Harrold Carswell. Carswell had been nominated by Eisenhower and Nixon and confirmed by the US Senate two separate occasions, including in 1969. Nixon notes in his memoirs, "the ritual charges of "racist" were made in the media and in Congress". Carswell had made the horrible mistake in his past of saying he supported segregation in 1948. This statement was made when the Armed Forces were just being integrated. This twenty two year old statement came back to haunt him, there were questions of his "competence", and his nomination was rejected. This competence was not a problem for the Appeals Court, which somehow gets glossed over due to the political SCOTUS fetish.

It also shows the problem of ever moving leftward that hurts anyone to the right of the current zeitgeist. It also shows the problem of media coverage of left vs. right as Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama can have anti-same sex marriage statements considered no problem since they evolved, but a target on the right can not be considered to have evolved. An interesting throw away fact on Carswell is that it is widely suspected he was gay or at least bisexual. Such a horribly oppressive time Carswell lived in. His closet was full of gay and segregationist skeletons.

Nixon and his team were well aware of the political opposition to the Southern flavor of their nominees. Nixon gave a speech that stressed this Southern problem. While his memoirs deny the anti-Southern animus, his speech reads differently,
I have reluctantly concluded that it is not possible to get confirmation for a Judge on the Supreme Court of any man who believes in the strict construction of the Constitution, as I do, if he happens to come from the South...
When you strip away all the hypocrisy, the real reason for their rejection was their legal philosophy, a philosophy that I share, of strict construction of the Constitution, and also the accident of their birth, the fact that they were born in the South...
Nixon would nominate a good Harvard trained man from Minnesota, Harry Blackmun. Chief Justice Burger was friends with Blackmun and had told Nixon he would keep an eye on him. Blackmun, the third off Burger's list, was confirmed by a vote of 94-0. This was another white, Harvard Law educated law and order type that Nixon nominated, yet he sailed through. All that was different between Haynsworth and Blackmun was home state. Blackmun would move from a moderate conservative to a consistently liberal judge. Read The Brethren for a fantastic inside view of the SCOTUS written with a super liberal bias to it. Woodward writes Burger as an inconsistent idiot, Marshall as super cool, and Blackmun is always being worked on to become more liberal. After writing Roe v. Wade, Blackmun takes the plunge and grows in love with being powerful, citing the case in other cases later in his career with no real connection to Roe.

Think of how often we hear accident of birth to explain privilege or some poor criminal's past to excuse his behavior. Nixon was noticing that these men were simply Southerners, and therefore, not worthy of SCOTUS confirmation by the Eastern Establishment. While the switch of a liberal seat (Fortas) for a conservative was a problem for the left, the main issue became their simple status as Southern gentlemen. Southerners have been few and far between for SCOTUS concerns. Clarence Thomas, a black, Southern conservative, was born a Georgian. He endured his own witch hunt, which when looked in hindsight was simply a political operation with sex as the excuse. The media has remarked in the recent decades about the Southern Strategy, the switch of the Solid South, the South's political effect on national politics and clout. No one ever mentions this. In an odd coincidence, America has seen many firsts since 1970 but no Southern, white men confirmed for the Supreme Court. Carswell and Haynsworth were the last two nominated. As the media loves to trumpet, the doors of discrimination have been knocked down except for cement doors that the left does not want anyone to notice that they have erected.

Friday, August 15, 2014

The Ladder Theory

Why do people tolerate the awful things their lovers or spouses do? I am a firm believer in not forgiving cheating. People will do what you allow them to do and treat you how you let them treat you. Think of all the text game posts around the manosphere. A woman could choose to not respond to jerks but she still does. Same goes for guys who forgive cheating. Anyone ever ask why these guys do it? It is not simply beta, omega, loser, or dorkus. It comes down to self esteem and self evaluation. It comes down to how a man (or woman) views their position on the ladder.

The Ladder Theory is that in the dating market, we all stand on a ladder. The rungs are our partners or potential partners. We are reluctant to take steps down from our perceived current spot. We will always look to take steps up. Sometimes we reach for a higher rung well above our spot because of its lofty location. Sometimes people are holding onto a rung that they feel is as high as they will go and their feet are dangling. Note that this spot is usually where a guy will propose to lock a woman down. There is a ladder for both genders, and if you envision the ladder and say a drop in someone's sexual market value, a woman trying to get engaged and latch onto some man at 30 is like a desperate grab to hold onto their spot on the ladder.

When you read these horror stories of women (let me focus on the bad woman, forgiving man scenario) behaving badly and guys taking them back, look at the guy. He is probably reaching high above where he really places himself on the ladder. If not, he might be valuing himself really low. The message I send of never forgiving cheating is that woman is bound to do it again. Even if you think she is hot, there is always someone younger and who has not betrayed your trust you can leave her for. Always. The sands of time wear on everyone, but young men, the numbers game gets better for you. A potential strategy is take her back, and then use her being high on the ladder to get you a new, hotter girlfriend. Women love the taken, off limits guy, so use her as pre-selection and get out of there.

The Ladder Theory is an old one friends and I used to discuss and refine like the Wave Theory or the old Internet idea, the Deacon Effect. I bring it up after the wonderfully race baiting, dark post by Heartiste yesterday. Yes, horrible stories like that are wretched enough for unrestrained female behavior, but instead of just pointing and shouting "beta" at the guy, figure it out and how to stop others from making the same mistake. The beta in the photo was a normal looking 18 year old. He does not know yet that the relationship is doomed but that he'll recover and do better. Guys fifteen years older with Faceborg profiles can see the ones that thankfully got away. You can spin just about every break up with a crazy woman in your favor. Regular Joes and professional, millionaire athletes can make the same mistake (twice). Do not tolerate bad behavior. This is a lost cause but hopefully, it reaches one guy out there. The next one would be "don't tolerate fatties", but that one is hopeless too.

Thursday, August 14, 2014

Russia, The Isolated Extrovert

Often in the US media there is the word isolated or isolation to refer to Russia or Vlad Putin. Putin is isolated. Russia is facing isolation. It is either wishful thinking or projection by or elite media. All one has to do is take a look at moves and headlines from around the globe to get a feel for reality.

Hungary mentions the
idea of moving towards a Russia or Chinese model. A few months back, I wrote about Hungary, but now the US media is using the phrase "the mask is off". Oh my God, the mask is off. Orban came to power through the ballot. His party engineered some changes to secure power, and now he is straying from the liberal democracy path. Liberal democracy looking authoritarian and dysfunctional now. Maybe this explains the NY Times project of reporting anti-semitism in Hungary.


Russia has expanding bilateral trade agreements and currency usage. They are not alone. China now conducts 20% of all its trade in yuan as opposed to 2% in 2010. Evading the dollar is the game for anyone who sees the future.


Russia and China are setting up a joint university. Cooperation in academia. Maybe they can have an Isolation Studies Department.

As discussed yesterday, Merkel is working directly with Russia for some resolution to the Ukrainian situation. Germany has been very slow to support the US sanctions on Russia. The sanctions hurt Europe significantly.
Economic and political pain is coming.

Russia and Turkey are
discussing trade agreements and the possibility of just using lira and rubles to settle trade. Turkey is a bit of a large country with an economy almost a trillion in size (17th largest worldwide). Turkey is in a special spot for pipeline construction from the heart of oil production to Europe (Caspian Sea prospects, not just the Middle East). Turkey also has a Byzantine internal political situation. Who exactly does the US support? What if Erdogan needs a helping hand or support to stay in power? Either way, the Turks are talking big money with the Russians.




Modi knifed the WTO. This is not the end of globalization, but by golly, it sure does make things look tougher. The agreement went from a sure thing to nope. It also is a push for nationalist ambitions away from the banker-globalist cabal. That is generally the problem here. There are leaders with nationalist leanings and others with globalist leanings. Putin and Modi are two of them. India and China have had beef with the idea of new WTO agreements and global accords that force climate change restrictions on them. The US is still pushing for carbon control. A wounded WTO will wound global attempts at forced climate control. India, kind of a big county (10th largest economy).


Very limited of course, but the vulture fund shakedown going on with Argentina is pushing
Argentina into the arms of Russia and China. Argentina is a basket case economically, and should be careful what it wishes for but is sending diplomats to Russia as I type. Still, all Russia and China have to do is create a plausible alternative to the US $ system.


The Russians countered sanctions with food import bans, and then upped their food imports from Brazil.
Hurt Euros and help BRICs. It is a simple substitution.

Russia keeps buying gold, which is odd... or is it? many other central banks keep buying gold.


Russia also signed a new
$20 billion oil agreement with Iran. That is pretty weird. Russia seems to get somewhere in their negotiations with Iran, while the US just hits a wall. Maybe the US wants to finish the negotiations but AIPAC and the Saudis keep interfering.
 

The Saudis are talking to Russia as well, but do not forget Egypt. Arms deals and trade rolling on between those two.

Remind me? What is the meaning of the word isolated? Looking at the links above, I cannot help but think the Russians are working feverishly at making friends. Making friends with people who might be disgruntled with Uncle Sam. It is as if Russia realized to hurt the US, they would have to hurt current customers so they secured huge commodities deals with non-European customers to make up for the adverse effects on Russia. A smart play about Russian counter-sanctions is that it hurts the nations who are not instigating these sanctions and just giving the US some bodies behind it for global support. Some countries may crack, some may not and see their economies get dinged and maybe the Western banking vultures move in on them, but either way, if nations' economies slump enough to cause problems or nations stop supporting American sanctions, it will be the US that stands isolated.

Wednesday, August 13, 2014

Germany-Russia Rapprochement Amid Anglo-German Tension

Foreign policy and money have long been linked. The colonial view of mercantilism is centuries old. Some historians argue Rome was a conquest and plunder economy that started to collapse when they ran out of areas to conquer with reasonable effort. Money is the weak link of the US system. The Russians have been open with noticing this. It is not just the US world order system but the USG domestic situation. A big piece of this system are our vassals friends in Europe. Europe is not the center of the dollar system, but much closer than our friends on the periphery in Asia and below the equator who have had crises in the last thirty years. I wrote months ago about Anglo-German tensions. It appears the tension is real, the Germans are cuddling up to the Russians and the Americans are spooked.

Anglo-German tensions have risen with open moves like gold repatriation, spy ejections, protests against the US Federal Reserve in Germany, and explicit anger over NSA spying. The current chessboard has the little Ukrainian piece that the US was eager to topple but Germany wasn't, inspiring Victoria Nuland to say "f*ck the EU". Fast forward months later, and with real civil war going on, it has been leaked that the German's were close to a land for gas deal to end sanctions, bring a peaceful resolution to the Ukraine crisis and keep the gas flowing. Russia is Germany's 11th biggest trade partner. Germany is a bit more reliant than France or the UK on Russian gas, and right now Germany is the only piece of the EU able to fund all the bailout mechanisms and keep growing. Each time a nation needs some form of bailout in the EU, their share of the bailout responsibility would have to be picked up by solvent nations. This gets ugly quick. Germany cannot absorb losses or hits whether to them or the EU. This is why it makes sense for them to reach out directly as reported to solve the American manufactured Ukrainian crisis.



Read the UK Independent's leaked Germany-Russia deal article. Angela Merkel is involved, and the leak specifically cites her dealing with Putin. Contrast this with President Obama's interactions with Putin.
Such strong trade ties between the two countries have also served to strengthen Ms Merkel’s hand and the Russian speaker has emerged as the leading advocate of closer relations between the EU and Russia. “This is Merkel’s deal. She has been dealing direct with President Putin on this. She needs to solve the dispute because it’s in no one’s interest to have tension in Ukraine or to have Russia out in the cold. No one wants another Cold War,” said one insider close to the negotiations.

It states basic diplomatic measures that gets the gas flowing again, recognizes the Crimea as Russian, sets up a looser Ukraine and stops Ukrainian entry into NATO. Peace for Europe, but the USG does not get its way.

This also explains the MH17 crash being something to use on Germany, not Russia. This becomes a quick wedge. Read the land for gas link. Germany was ready to wrap up the Ukraine solution until MH17 happened. The initial accusation of Russian involvement paused the negotiations from completing, and now, everyone knows, which means the US can apply pressure openly on Germany. The indirect pressure has been out for a while. The US Federal Reserve warned Deutsche Bank for its derivatives portfolio and is throwing up regulatory obstacles to DB's move into the US. Maybe Deutsche Bank will be the next AIG. Wall Street could use a new fall guy. MH17 itself is going to be investigated in the Netherlands with German technical help. It would be incredibly evil to set up a plane crash, but no need for much speculation considering no one has an answer for the first Malaysian Airlines crash. Timing is too odd, and so is the American rush to implicate Russia and now backing off as evidence seems to be sparse but not pointing to Russia.

The USG, mad drunk leviathan that it is, will not let a peaceful resolution happen quickly. It also must work to keep its clients in line. Germany is making long term moves and must see the future for the USG, which is a destiny the USG mandarins will not accept. German media is noticing that the USG is acting so wild that it would be an easy sell that it was the work of KGB moles to make the US look bad.  It is a bit of a mad world we live in where the Western media demonize Putin, who whether working for Russian interests or just his own, is setting up with the Chinese a monetary bloc to counter and slow down the USG, offered up a solution in Syria that stopped US warplanes, and was just trying to end a Ukrainian Civil War. The US media cannot admit we are at fault because the US media's chosen good guys are at the helm of the ship. The USG can pull stunts like this now, but eventually the threats will get emptier or a big enough client will force action on a threat, and things will get ugly. Dollars hold it all together, and dollars will bring it down. Germany knows this. If Germany can set up shop in Europe as the regional hegemon, it might as well make buddies with the eastern neighbor that is nuclear armed.

Tuesday, August 12, 2014

Airports: Concentrated US Empire

Have you flown recently? Whether business or pleasure, I have flown too often in the last year. It is a horrendous experience amongst the many horrendous late stage American Empire experiences. Air travel mirrors the US Empire well as pre-deregulation air travel was a pricey privilege for businesses and consumers capable and willing to spend the money to fly. Deregulation brought the bus station to the skies, much like the rest of the prole drift and devolution we see today around us. Airports are a concentrated experience of our late stage American Empire experience.

1. The police state is ever present. TSA, no bags can be left alone, cameras, everywhere is a reminder that you are locked in and watched.
2. Everyone gets molested by the TSA, treated meh by the airlines we have bailed out, and feels mostly miserable.
2a. TSA - Newest government agency that immediately became stereotypical government employees. Entitled workers who act like jerks performing a job that we should work hard to replace with a combination of robots and dogs (or robo-dogs).
3. The bus station has found the skies. You just hope the worst underclass representative is not seated next to you.
4. Do fellow fliers look American? Look American doesn't mean anything anymore thanks to immigration, but airports shove it in your face. How many languages do you hear?
5. Count the hijabs. Not just on fliers but on the airport workers, including security workers. What could possibly go wrong?
6. Anyone socialize? How can such different groups do so? Why bother because the airports have given that which we need to survive in our dystopian public spaces: FREE WIFI AND RECHARGING STATIONS!
7. You have to get there so early for screening because our elites did not take the Fortress America route after 9/11 and profile Muhammad bin-Allah al-Jihad types. Screw stopping importation of Muhammad Jihad types and just profiling them when flying, let's screw over everyone else.
8. "Oh no, we tortured 6 terrorists 10 years ago!" > forgets about millions of innocent people molested + harassed daily just to fly <
9. I like paying for $10 bags of trail mix, $5 bottles of water and $3 bags of M+Ms. They must've banned taking water through the checkpoints for our safety though.
10. The only shared feeling is anger or annoyance at the trap all are in.

Air travel was once glamorous. Air travel had an air of luxury not just due to its cost but customer service (not to mention leg room). That was a generation or two ago. Unhappy, overworked, worried about missing a connection, stranger in your homeland, airports reflect the broken experiment that is post-'68 America.