We Who Must Be Held Accountable

Surprise, surprise, Detroit is rated by some travel agency for well-heeled gays as the nation's most lethal city for the cruiser on the go. Who to blame? Need I ask?

[gay activist Dave] Garcia points to Michigan’s state legislature and governor who, he says, “have created an anti-gay environment across the entire state.” “It is still legal to fire people in Michigan for being gay, we can not marry, can not adopt, and the governor signed away domestic partner benefits for LGBT public employees,” Garcia said. “Conservatives in Lansing have placed Michigan at a huge economic disadvantage as we continue to lose top LGBT talent to our neighbors by creating a hostile environment state-wide for LGBT people and they must be held accountable for it.”

You see, those lawless brothers preying on homosexuals (and scaring away their money) are taking all their cues from Republican politicians and the laws of the state of Michigan (who are guilty of scaring away queer money!).

The ugly truth--black people wrecked Detroit and keep it wrecked--is nothing as compared to the theoretical tragedy of all those lost boy-bucks! Damn it man, the city might be thriving but for these incorrigible white male bigots! Ironic, but it apparently takes cast-iron balls to be a gay activist.
Considering the reality of Detroit's economic destruction and the untold suffering to come of it, Mr. Garcia's overreaching should be greeted with the same opprobrium given Holocaust deniers. But it does not. It is typical.
 People wonder why some of us went over the edge at some point and just started talking about race frankly. This is why; convention is not just inaccurate, it is a lie. It's an affront; every time someone invokes "white privilege" he slanders a people and advances a disaster. The "anti-racists" are right: there's no middle ground here. There are the enlightened, there are the benighted, and there are the evil. They just don't know which two of the three they comprise.

And here, confronted with yet more data documenting the failure of Detroit's blacks and the progressive politics that unleash their malice--and the contradiction of a multicultural movement that purports to speak for both the black criminal and the affluent gay--what does CBS Detroit do? Rather, what is, apparently, the only thing they're capable of, whether it's by their own inclination or outside pressure?

They call this regional gay party hack and act as passive conduit for his embarrassing stretch. All advantage accrues to the favored, whatever the reality. The left's narrative is unopposed. Black Detroit preys on gays? Fuck you, it's because the Republicans hate queers! You don't have to make sense when you run things, loser. Anyone who runs is VC. Anyone who stands still is well-disciplined VC.

The Gay Lobby: "...you just don't lead 'em so much! Ain't oppression hell?! Ha-ha!"

"Someday I'm going to make you Mrs. David Petraus..."

Alpha males of yesteryear had it made. Buck's secretary-squeeze wasn't some overreaching, gym-sinewed mini-terror with more ambition than brains bound to leave his career strewn in her wake:

Ah, Patriarchy! We hardly knew ye!

Lyric on the Fly

Poor little guy,
what did he think?
Did he feel the void sigh
as he came upon the brink?

And will I know when
my own time is nigh?
Or go in oblivion
like this dumb fly?

Lord grant me the courage
to face that same abyss
Failing that,
make me oblivious

"Talk" Talk

Add this to Derbyshire's list: Don't place your children in the care of blacks.

Comments Elsewhere, Edited, or, The Lamentations of the Womanish and Childlike

Comes now the latest attempt at silencing Matt Drudge's recurring Blacks Behaving Badly theme. Where Bill Maher deployed the pillory, this blogger attempts a plea in an "open letter", complete with flattery and concern trolling (thank God I'm surrounded by the apolitical; if anyone ever expresses concern for the "future of the Republican Party" in my presence I think I'll strangle them). Enjoy with me the sound of The Hill's plaintive wail:

A visit to the Drudge Report at any given time in recent months bears witness to story after story, time and time again, day after day, week after week, month after month, of a laundry list of stories with racial innuendo and suggestion and implication that I would like to believe are below the standards you would set for yourself and your profession. [apparently the author is doubly confused:  Matt Drudge is a "journalist", and journalism retains "standards"]

I couldn't resist:
Drudge's "race-baiting" operates within the context of a grand, deliberate lie. That lie: black people are no more violent, no less intelligent and no less industrious than the rest of us. On television and in film we are continually presented images of black humanity and competence that do not comport with the reality we all experience daily (who are you trying to kid, Hollywood?). The respectable media, as evidenced here, does its part by ignoring the black malice and lawlessness that is an unrelenting assault (as the author notes above, "day after day, week after week, month after month"--indeed). The endemic, bemusing buffoonery of black culture, infecting even black "intellectuals" and leaders, is met with a silent, condescending smile. 

Policy and law are made in the distorting light of this disinformation. Vast sums are spent trying to square the circle of black inadequacy (see the achievement gap). Discriminatory hiring degrades the quality of our organizations and professions. People are hurt, or worse, if they are foolish or uninformed enough to believe the lie.

 You want me to avert my eyes? Stop telling me black dysfunction is my fault and I'll stop exposing it as a lie. Stop robbing me and my kin. Stop slandering my race (I'll apologize for slavery once every black person in America thanks me for modern medicine, democracy, electric light, plumbing, sliced bread, etc). Drudge is allowed his intentions, biases and even bigotry. I don't care. A speaker's motives haven't the power to make a bad argument look good (indeed, they're usually impugned to make a good argument look bad, as above).

But it does take nerve to condemn Drudge's focus in the midst of all the racist glorying following the election (how many more times do we have to read about "old, white" etc?). And what are the anti-whites celebrating? What is the nature of their triumph? Did blacks and Hispanics become electoral power brokers by achievement? By out-sized contributions to the nation? No; it is only by their numbers, and the dysfunction that makes them the sick child of the American family, that they overcome the "old" and "white". They succeed by failing. It's fascinating really. Let's at least be honest about the nature of our transformation.

Drudge is a necessary corrective to the Grand Lie you worship. This lie, like any, cannot be made any more true by prevailing (even over the entire West); it can only become more and more obviously a lie. It is an article of faith: rigid, unchanging, impervious to reason and empiricism. Against this reality stands out in clear relief. This is only going to get worse. Get used to it. As you keep pointing out, it's your country now. Own it.

As for me I say: speak the truth, whatever it is. Let the heavens fall and the hacks tremble. And as for your concern trolling: let the Republican Party go to hell.

(Kh)Q(G)ad(d)af(f)i's Revenge

The New York Times reports on the suspected leader of the Benghazi attack:

Mr. Abu Khattala was a member of the Islamist opposition under Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi and was imprisoned in his notorious Abu Salim prison. Unlike most of the other Islamist prisoners, however, Mr. Abu Khattala never renounced violence as a means for seeking political change. He was let out of prison only last year, along with a batch of other political prisoners released in a futile bid by the government to appease the nascent uprising.

What's in a Name

"Excuse me. Are you the Judean People's Front?"
"Fuck off! We're the People's Front of Judea!"
--Life of Brian

The potential sackers of any future US embassy in Syria* have made what they must see as a major concession to their Western benefactors:

Powerful Syrian Islamist brigades, frustrated at the growing divisions among rebels...formed the "Front to Liberate Syria"
(...)
Originally the group was called the Islamic Front to Liberate Syria. Brigade leaders voted to drop the word 'Islamic' but Islam remains a central element...

*Who's the poor sap in line for that job?
It's after the election: Obama has barely survived a bruising and emotionally draining campaign. He addresses a dishevelled man in the Oval Office; Valerie Jarret is sitting in shadows behind him.
"So, like I said, Bob, forget about it. Lots of mistakes were made in this campaign. I almost made one myself. No shit! I'll tell you about it some time. Anyhow, what's a swing state or two? That was a joke. But I'm going to need my best man out there in SIR [Syrian Islamic Republic], at least until things settle down a bit..."

Diversity is...

...the gradual erosion of rights:

“We, as Americans, have to put limits and borders [on] freedom of speech,” Qatanani, leader of the Islamic Center of Passaic County (ICPC), told TheBlaze. He explained that while Americans may "have the freedom" to speak their mind, ultimately, they “have no right to [talk about Muslim] holy issues“ as it will incite ”hatred or war among people.”

The erasure of our own physical borders by our transnational elite has to eventually mean new legal borders here. This is necessitated by two things that need not be connected, but are hard-wired into the minds of the new men and women of our elite, the necessity of war and of open borders.

Our wars produce outrage; we import it via immigration, and--this is less appreciated--inculcate it in previously peaceful populations, like American Muslims. They are encouraged by Marxian anti-white convention to view themselves as a distinct ethnicity within America--after 9/11 this crystallized into the budding movement we see now. American Muslims are reasonably alarmed at the harsh vulgarity of mainstream American culture, its unyielding assault on tradition and religion as such. There is an invitation to withdraw (you and I haven't that luxury) or, if you're the ambitious type, to challenge it. The reality of Oil and Israel mean we cannot disengage from the Middle East, under any circumstances. It will not be allowed. This doesn't get better.

In the latest case of Muslim outrage it's worth noting an Egyptian Coptic Christian brought his beef with Islam to America and from here wages his war on it. America not only isn't "behind" the video as millions of idiot Muslims think (albeit because the Administration and their media allies used it to cover their grotesque failure in Libya), "America" isn't even involved in the exchange. But like water finding its level, we will have to adapt, not because Islam is violently intolerant, or because they hate us for our crimes, but because both are simultaneously true.

How Soon is Now?

When you say it's gonna happen now
 Well when exactly do you mean?
See I've already waited too long
 And all my hope is gone
--The Smiths

I don't expect this to stop. But can we at least stop pretending? I accept that history and the apparently inexhaustible malice of black America means a debt incurred in perpetuity. We will pay (as long as there is a "we"), in money, peace, dignity--with our lives, yes, for this deficit between our demonstrated humanity and theirs.

The wages of the sin of slavery are--another sort of slavery, visited upon the descendants of all. We are slaves to fear and loathing. We are silent as slaves before the endless  humiliations of the bulked-up, uninhibited brute descendants of the poor brutes our forefathers broke down and chained. Force the detachment on yourself, and marvel at the absurd symmetry of our tragedy. Imagine the hatred in the hearts of those slaves. Do they see its redemption? Do they smile? Could they ever have imagined?

But when do we get to just tell the truth? When will the last laughable shred of plausibility fall away from the tyrannical order? How much hell has to be raised before the heavens fall?

Howdy Doody, Master of the Universe

Via Zero Hedge, here's WINEP warrior Patrick Clawson  lamenting the prospects of a successful "crisis initiation", read false flag operation (or suggesting one, I can't really tell; he appears to be responding to a question from the audience here), to provoke a war over the resistance of President Obama, Congress and the Pentagon. By his lights this is the "traditional way America gets to war" (and here would be "best for US interests").
He also suggests escalating the current covert war on Iran from sabotage and assassination to, say, sinking an Iranian submarine (but he's not "advocating" it, mind you), delighting his fellow ghouls with this bit of mischevious wit (I've got to party with you, man!):

Diversity is...

...military failure:

The Taliban's ability to infiltrate throughout the Afghan National Police (ANP) and Army (ANA) may have been facilitated by efforts to "homogenize" those forces in 2007 and 2008. Initially, many units in both forces were organized along regional or ethnic lines. Existing regional and ethnic divides were thus institutionalized - hardly a way to create national unity and lessen tensions among groups that have been at war for three decades .  

The new plan was to create units that were roughly proportional to the ethnic makeup of the country: Pashtun at 42 percent, Tajik at 27 percent, Hazara and Uzbek at 9 percent each, Turkmen at 3 percent, and several smaller groups, including nomads, making up the remaining 10 percent.

It is believed that it was at this time that the Taliban were able to insert sleeper agents into every major ANA and ANP unit throughout the country. These agents are now being awakened and given missions designed to demoralize ISAF forces and drive a wedge of mistrust between trainer and trainee.

Sounds like the Pentagon replaced the traditional accommodation of diversity, divvying up institutions by ethnicity, which no doubt hinders the creation or fiction of a national identity, with our own naively radical notions of proportional representation and desegregation.

Scene Stealing

Raging Bull, 1980

warning: prosthetic penis at 1:47

Boogie Nights, 1997

Alas, YouTube has pulled the above scene because of (simulated) nudity. The point was that Paul Thomas Anderson ended his classic with this sly homage to an earlier one. I'm not sure he's ever told anyone, or that anyone has ever pointed it out before. No dick jokes please (unless they're really funny).

Ch-ch-ch-changes; turn and face the strain...

Today appears a new verification page attached to title searches at my local library's website:

The feature you have selected is associated with data in your customer account. Such data may be accessed by law enforcement personnel without your consent. See our Confidentiality Policy which can be accessed on our Home page under Policies.

This Headline Should Read...

Chicago Teachers Strike for Better Students

Daily Affirmation, Dale Style

Life is defined by that irregular, indefinable hard boundary--like a rocky wall hidden in the mist—that is our individual nature, that is to say our limitations, against which our ambitions, and pride, are repeatedly dashed unto the end of our days.

Somewhere in California

Transparent Government

Has anyone else noticed the acronym for president's administrative amnesty plan, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), is Spanish for "hand it over"?

¡Daca, cathrones!

Northern Light

Call it a Brooklyn Bath Toy

That public pool in Brooklyn that got the fifty million (!) dollar renovation, only to be overrun by Youths? It gets worse.
Looking at images of the pool you see why it cost so much to re-do, and why it may prove too expensive still: it's just too big to be safely operated--if the population is like Brooklyn's (just imagine that thing full of Youths!) and not like, say, Portland's. If the only concern is accidental drowning, you can hold the place down with a couple of well-trained lifeguards. If your concern includes the possibility of deliberate drowning... Fuggedaboudit.

Video of the latest degradation has surfaced:

Rebel, Rebel

Good reporting is where you find it. The Guardian on the globalist specters of the Syrian National Council:

This year was ["Paris-based Syrian academic" Bassma] Kodmani's second Bilderberg. At the 2008 conference, Kodmani was listed as French; by 2012, her Frenchness had fallen away and she was listed simply as "international" – her homeland had become the world of international relations.

Blue Sky Black Death, And Stars, Ringed

Meanwhile in Soviet America

Chick-fil-A's Vice President of public relations has died of a heart attack.
To be fair to the Soviets, despite looking I couldn't find a comparable example from Stalin's purges of someone succumbing to the strain of the show trial--a couple of poisonings maybe. It's kind of scary to think the Gays are just getting started.

Judging from his photo and bio, the late Don Perry was a member of Atlanta's mulatto elite, serving in a role typical for high-level executive diversity hires (but none so typical as the VP in charge of Diversity, of course--something will have to be done with that gauche cliche eventually).

Elsewhere: I think it was Steve Sailer who joked a more effective strategy for fixing black educational inadequacy would be to hit non-black students over the head with a ball-peen hammer. Go ahead, laugh it up. Like being careful what you wish for, in our time you should be careful what you joke about. Demanding racial equality in school discipline (and ignorance of the racial disparity in school misbehavior), the President's Advisory Committee on the Pursuit of the Grail White House Initiative On Educational Excellence is that hammer!

Original Sin Remix

I was nothing
Before I came to be
I was contentment
I was obscurity

Then I entered the world
And the grave world entered me
The world in terror I cursed
The world in return cursed me
With this dread: mor-tal-i-ty

Tweeting the Revolution

On Twitter, Mr Sock-it-to-the-Man Chris Rock is angry he's been denied the opportunity to grow up in a mud hut in what is now Angola:

Happy white peoples independence day the slaves weren't free but I'm sure they enjoyed fireworks

The powerful have made the elevation of Rock's inept and untrustworthy relatives (the mocking of whom has made him rich) an impossible standard of justice. Detroit is in ruins. Hip hop has gone from coarse to bloodthirsty. And Chris bleats away in between tweets about the Knicks. On Independence Day. Well and safely removed, you can bet, from the ghetto blacks he lampoons. What a dick.

Could it be that Chris Rock doesn't understand the nature of his success? That, after all this time, he still doesn't get they joke? That he doesn't understand the consequences of his observations?

(Upon having his epiphany, fellow millionaire minstrel Dave Chapelle fled to Africa to consult with Lauryn Hill. Ms Hill is probably the least funny person on earth--but one of the few black Americans to actually give Africa an honest try; Chapelle went as if to be exorcised of his talent, and it may have worked.)

I think that over time every good Chris Rock joke will come back to haunt him, if he only has the awareness to catch on. I recall his take on the hyped token Colin Powell from 1996:



He's so busy taking exaggerated offense at white condescension he misses the real insight. Will Chris Rock ever acknowledge how comically wrong he was here? The irony--Chris bellows that despite this condescension white America would never elevate this man (Powell, who would be obscure if he were white; but "edgy" Chris ain't going there!) to the presidency; and then along comes Barack Hussein Obama (who himself thought his political career would be derailed by 9/11). And what is the mantra? "Oh he speaks so well." Rock mimicked the language of condescension perfectly, but understood it less--no mean feat--than the whites who originated it. They meant it. Rock missed it. That should be in the act. Imagine him pacing and shouting like he does, admitting:

"Not only did I get it wrong, but Barack Hussein Obama! Motherfuckin' Hu-ssein, Oh-fucking-Bah-ma! Colin Powell just came off too normal! I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about or white people have just gone crazy!"

He nailed the critique of Obama before Obama, but poor Chris doesn't know, because once Obama showed up Chris became one of the mewling patsies he excoriates.

It's remarkable how universal is the convention that everything must be hedged by the myth of white racism and the denial of black agency. The right-thinker has to compartmentalize aspects of the black American condition in ways he wouldn't when considering other questions, deliberately or subconsciously avoiding inferences he would be allowed if the question wasn't so loaded. Segregation is key!

So when the right-thinker sees, for instance, racial disparity in the professions he can only see discrimination by employers. He forgets that five minutes before he was condemning (with even less authority) the unfair racial disparity in educational achievement! No matter; the existence of a great, stifled class of black professionals, milling about outside the gates, is presumed; just as universities are cut no slack for the sorry state of black and brown high school achievement.

A cynical progressive has to appreciate the durability of disparity--an endless source of demagogy. Even as the earnest among them search out the source of minority underachievement like explorers seeking the source of the Nile (they're somewhere below pre-school by now; see Steve Sailer's Stolen Generation) progressives are conceding nothing. Where there is black failure there is white malice. Anything less acknowledges black inadequacy. When that happens, the scam is up.

But the unsubtle and incurious easily adopt the habits of faith over logic. So it's entirely possible that Chris Rock has been these many years chronicling black buffoonery yet taking it to be of no real consequence and anyone who says it is for a bigot! And because this attitude has been mandated by the convention of our dishonest age, Rock's tepid half-truths pass for coruscating honesty.

The Hate Whose Name We Dare not Speak

Right-wing tweet aggregator Twitchy is back with another disingenuous exposee of shocking black bigotry (here dancing about traditional Maypole Sarah Palin), veiling it as virulence from the "Left". The covert critique continues.

At least they don't say "liberal". It's time to formally divest the Left of any association with liberty. Classic liberalism is dead and discarded. There is no room for Locke and Mill among the factions of multiculturalism and its attendant demagogy. They are dead white males after all.

Liberty's assassins affect mourning for the passing of "civility". Meanwhile their black thug shock troops roam the streets defiling, destroying, making war on anything that smacks of civilization, which they find as effete and contemptible as the white weaklings they terrify with their mere presence. Who's to say they're wrong anymore? They make their assertion--society has no claim on me--and then go out and prove it.

Day Off

*

*

I'm so scared! There's no escaping stale film references!

It's a cairn, dumbass.

*

*

A good turnaround point.
*

*

"Ah, when are they going to plug that up already?"

Bill's Bleeding Heart Show

Does Bill Maher think Matt Drudge is making up stories about black malice?

No. He condemns Drudge's editorial focus, not his veracity. Drudge pays undue attention to negative black behavior. Who decides what constitutes undue attention? Bill Maher says Bill Maher decides. But we already knew that.

Bill wants you to know Matt Drudge is a racist. Bill misses the point entirely. Who cares who's a racist anymore? It doesn't matter why Drudge insists on rubbing Bill's prominent proboscis in black misbehavior and violence (Maher "monitored" every disgusting post that week). Maher derides the relevance of Drudge's choices. But of what relevance is the reality of black malice?

Liberals will remind you violent crime generally remains down, and the average American still hasn't a reasonable fear of blacks as long as he stays out of their neighborhoods. So only the bad people, the Other White People, notice. It is a matter of proud indifference for Bill.  But the violence itself is the least of it; it's what that violence demonstrates: the Left's critique of race and civil rights is a thoroughgoing lie. Black, not white, Americans are failing at equality. Black America is rejecting the Western liberal tradition, to the extent it understands it.

Bill Maher thinks he's outraged by Matt Drudge's stereotyping of blacks; by his prejudice against them; by his lack of (what Bill refuses to call) Christian charity toward them and their problems. But we can see that's pure bunk.

What should fret Maher is what black violence and failure says about the myth of white racism, founding myth of the perverted Christianity that progressivism has become. Without it, and without its redemption fable--absolution by righting the ultimate wrong of white American slavery (with Barack Obama as a minor messiah)--the entire progressive edifice is threatened. As that messiah gives the tacit approval of silence to the violence while concurrently betraying every traditional (dread word!) progressive cause, it has to dawn, eventually, even on Bill, that black folk, and any elite that may come from them, want nothing whatsoever to do with his absolution. They can neither spell nor define the word. Bill is just another white chump taken in by the brothers. If only he was poor white trash he would have seen it coming.

Something John Derbyshire said in his Gawker interview  strikes me: the present anti-racist hysterics might be explained by the justified anxiety of the Left before the demographic carnage it has wrought. We all have to swim in the same waters. Or at least, insulation is expensive. But if one can't trust in that timeless American image of the noble, suffering black, if black America shoves him aside to celebrate such buffoonish monsters as, yes Bill, a Mike Tyson or Reverend Farrakhan, then what can one trust? The black-white reparations model has been adopted by all manner of political identity, culminating in the sudden domination of gay advocacy. All these other identities are invested in black Americans at least making a show of it.

When Bill snarls that Matt Drudge should look away or shut up, he is engaged in containment. Potential waves of disillusion threaten to cascade outward, leveling the theoretical architecture of the American Left. The oppression of the past explains the malice of the present, convention demands; the crime thinker wonders if the malice of the present doesn't in fact explain the oppression of the past. The Narrative wearies. The Left should be worried. They have created a model and a monster called Resentment, encouraging all to apply for a franchise.
Thee have conquered. Now what?

This presents an existential crisis for the individual. If black people really are their own worst enemy, and their neighbors' worst enemy, what's it all been about? For the faithful Bill Maher, all he's left with is a Godless world and a big lie.

Hate in the USA

Black folk on the Walker recall defeat.
Note how the site (Twitchy, which compiles political tweets from a Fox News-like "conservative" angle) sells this compendium as "angry libs" going off. Our furtive fascination with black American violence: the critique that dare not speak its name.

Not a Nation of Immigrants

Cultural survival for Bibi, not for thee, America.

We should commission a giant statue, with a plaque calling for the world's wretched, and ship it to Israel.

Shocked, Shocked

Prosecutors managed to revoke George Zimmerman's bail today over a financial disclosure technicality. They, and Martin family attorney Ben Crump, want to jail him until an expected trial next year. From the AP:

At Friday’s court hearing, De la Rionda and O’Mara also asked a judge to stop the public release of witness names and statements made by Zimmerman to police officers. Those documents normally are part of the public record under Florida law. 

“What’s occurring, unfortunately, are cases are being tried in the public sector as opposed to in the courtroom,” De La Rionda said. “We are in a new age with Twitter, Facebook, and all these things I’ve never heard of before in my career. Everybody gets to find out intimate details about witnesses that never occurred before. Witnesses are going to be reluctant to get involved.”

Nooooooo! Prejudicial media hype and intimidation?! After the hearing the prosecutors no doubt collected their winnings updated their social media pages.

Your google hits sir...

Of course, today's hearings were largely (and maybe primarily) an operation intent on prejudicing the prosecutor's "public sector" against Zimmerman, an opportunity to get this quote in the papers:

“This court was led to believe they didn’t have a single penny,” said De la Rionda. “It was misleading and I don’t know what words to use other than it was a blatant lie.”

I am unmoved. The AP helpfully shepherds us through the narrative:

Crump was asked if he thought that if Zimmerman would be willing to lie about his finances that he would be willing to lie about what happen the night Martin was killed.   

“We fully expect that the special prosecutor will make George Zimmerman’s credibility be front and center in this entire case,” Crump said. “And whatever dishonesty that comes forth by George Zimmerman that they can prove, you can best believe it will be the issue of this case and rightfully so.”

I'm sure there's enough integrity left in the courts that Zimmerman will be allowed to post a higher bond and remain free for the time being. Perhaps this prosecutorial stunt has something to do with negotiations behind the scenes--to apply pressure or make good a threat.

The original AP story's lead has been updated (Sat 6/2) to take up the narrative assault on Zimmerman's credibility:

The credibility of Trayvon Martin’s shooter could be an issue at trial after a judge said that George Zimmerman and his wife lied to the court about their finances to obtain a bond, legal experts say.

At no point will an analysis of Zimmerman's accusers' credibility get its own news cycle, of course.

The Audacity of Expedience

From this NYT article on Obama's drone war:

They describe a paradoxical leader who shunned the legislative deal-making required to close the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay in Cuba, but approves lethal action [drone strikes] without hand-wringing.
(...)
Yet the administration’s very success at killing terrorism suspects has been shadowed by a suspicion: that Mr. Obama has avoided the complications of detention by deciding, in effect, to take no prisoners alive. While scores of suspects have been killed under Mr. Obama, only one has been taken into American custody, and the president has balked at adding new prisoners to Guantánamo.
(...)
David Axelrod, the president’s closest political adviser, began showing up at the “Terror Tuesday” meetings [where that week's drone assassination targets are decided upon], his unspeaking presence a visible reminder of what everyone understood: a successful attack would overwhelm the president’s other aspirations and achievements.

Earlier I had taken to calling Mr. Axelrod "the Undertaker" because he looks like one with that somber visage, but now the moniker seems apt for other reasons.

All out of transformation: Chewing bubble gum and keeping the president's "aspirations" in the black.

The Staple Singers, A Hard Rain's a-Gonna Fall

Criminalizing Context Recognition

It had to end here. The Trayvonicus lynch-meme sputters on, but is starting to look like a particularly depressing Al Sharpton hoax as we learn George Zimmerman's injuries were documented and consistent with a beating. Eyewitnesses testified to them from the start of course, but most Americans have only the legal discovery process to thank for the belated information. The networks were too busy with the sort of yellow journalism that had Marcia Clark declaring George Zimmerman sustained no injuries because, as the security camera video clearly shows, he retains powers of locomotion and isn't cradling his gutted entrails like a football just hours later (not since Bill Frist video-diagnosed Terri Schiavo...).  Of course this evidence was available to the special prosecutor brought in to bring Zimmerman up on charges. Didn't make it into the affidavit. Hey, I think I found that crime you been looking for!
But Zimmerman's real misfortune is to not have been born George Ramos. That's what so aroused the elite media, at first expecting nothing more than another ritual sacrifice to the national god of black resentment. Now they have this potential national race riot on their hands. So no matter if Zimmerman looks increasingly innocent; the thing must be seen to its (responsible elites hope) riot-defusing conclusion. As if by evil design then it will run alongside the president's election campaign of race-baiting demagogy--five more months, including summer, pumping the bellows of resentment (November or Bust!)--on one hand and the traditional summer season of black on white violence on the other. The diversity demagogues are fighting this one like there's no tomorrow. Maybe they're right.
 But they have a fallback position. At first they told us, and some (blessed naifs) believed George Zimmerman stalked and murdered a black boy. That position is no longer tenable. But there's no walking this one back down. So out comes the lamest of the stable of American white racism tropes: racial profiling. No matter what transpired, it all came as a result of Zimmerman's racist stereotyping. Cognition aforehand! Note that whether Zimmerman was right or not about Trayvon Martin isn't allowed in polite discussion; Martin's good nature is presumed. But a prosecution based on racial profiling would have to contend with this question, and the reality of statistical probabilities and black menace, in a high profile criminal trial. Does the left really want that?
It will get interesting, watching them argue this with a straight face against the backdrop of the traditional summer season of black on white violence. But of course they will. To maintain critical race theory's dominance over convention requires ever-greater powers of media denial, and the powers so far on display have been awe-inspiring. Ignoring violence such as last summer's flash-mobs in the age of Drudge and American Renaissance would seem impossible, but the respectable media did such a good job of it many of them truly don't even know it happened ("news to me" was one reporter's response, given as he defended censoring race out of a reported attack; and I'm willing to bet he still hasn't made the connection between his dereliction and his ignorance!).
And if they don't get to notice they'll be damned if we do either. So now George Zimmerman is a potential test-case for criminilazing "racial profiling", not by law enforcement (whatever validity that may have), but by a common citizen. The ABC News article linked ABC News article linked to above, revealing the extent of Zimmerman's injuries as well as Trayvon's (one set of bruised knuckles; one gunshot wound) gets around to it in the last paragraph:

However, the prosecution contends that Zimmerman instigated the confrontation after profiling the teen, who was walking home after buying skittles and ice tea. They prosecution says Martin was breaking no laws and was not disturbing anyone as he walked back to his father's girlfriend's home.

With the FBI now threatening hate crime charges, George Zimmerman may become the first American citizen convicted of racial stereotyping.

Now Repeat After Me

The Derbyshire agitation has so excited the wolves The National Review has deemed it necessary to throw a second passenger from the troika. The pack won't be sated as long as they're on the scent of blood, of course, so the remaining riders must be eyeing one another warily. Who's weak? Who's suspect? Is it me? Terror achieved.


Just a day after Rich Lowry agreed to dispatch contributor John Derbyshire for hate-cognition the editor was called on his new standard of association. From the left's Internet middle-management corps came the blog-memo: Robert Weissberg said "white nationalism" at an American Renaissance conference, surely a sin as great as Derbyshire's--ergo...
Lowry wouldn't make the same mistake twice--this time he'd waste no time in capitulation. He posted Weissberg's denunciation immediately, thanking the complainant for bringing the matter to his attention. Moving along...
But opening his disavowal with "Unbeknowst [sic] to us..." invites more interrogation: How could you have not known? Just what did you know? Who's responsible for associating the magazine with these men? Why the typo? Someone have a guilty conscience?

Alex Kurtagic notes Lowry's curt dismissal of Weissberg uses the same adjective for Weissberg's actions--"noxious"--his leftward cousin used in the initial accusatory blog. Perhaps it was coincidence--but such sloppiness is hardly a more charitable explanation.

I imagine it as that familiar scene in the movies; a mafioso reprimands an underling, delivers an order, then:
"Do we understand each other?"
"Yes".
Mafioso leans in, speaks deliberately:
"No. I need to hear you say it. Do we understand each other?"
Subordinate gets it, grows solemn.
"We understand each other. And thank you Mr ----".
"Don't mention it".
Mafioso gives subordinate a condescending pat on the cheek.*

Now go get your shine box, Mr. Lowry.

"I never agreed to three points on top of---gahgagghaggh!--noxious, right!--gaguhgrr!--noxious, noxious, I got it!"

*Lowry's quick-cave drew the condescension it deserved in an update to the original point-and-sputter post:
Update: Lowry has severed ties with Weissberg. In a statement, Lowry noted, "Unbeknowst to us, occasional Phi Beta Cons contributor Robert Weissberg (whose book was published a few years ago by Transaction) participated in an American Renaissance conference where he delivered a noxious talk about the future of white nationalism. He will no longer be posting here. Thanks to those who brought it to our attention."
You're welcome.

It's all so genial!

SWPL Central

No longer did Wall Street mean Protestant Good Family. There were plenty of prominent Jewish investment bankers...plenty of Irishmen, Greeks, Slavs. That none of the eighty members of the bond department was black or female didn't bother him...the bond trading room at Pierce & Pierce was no place for symbolic gestures.
--The Bonfire of the Vanities

Comments Elsewhere, Edited and Expanded

Regarding John Derbyshire's instantly (in)famous The Talk: Nonblack Version piece in Taki's (contrasting the faddish meme "The Talk"* and its hoary assumptions about racial hostility, with the reality of the known world), Mr. Josh Barro in Forbes steps into the town sqaure to deliver the King's writ as he sees it ("National Review Must Fire John Derbyshire"), and helpfully remind conservatives of their priorities, as such (no higher calling than Republican branding, for the "serious"):

And this is the problem for Lowry and other conservatives who want to be taken seriously by broad audiences when they write about racial issues.

"taken seriously by broad audiences"?
This is called selling out.
I understand why the aspirational individual seeks this; for the life of me I don't understand why he encourages it in others. How does one sleep at night knowing he is both pimp and prostitute for a great lie? Your affected enlghtenment isn't enough? What will you do if and when you've routed the racists? Who's next in providing you with the opportunity to prove your religious devotion?

"The Talk" as black Americans and liberals present it (to wit: necessitated by white malice), is a comic affront--because no one is allowed (see Barro above) to notice the context in which black Americans are having run-ins with the law, each other, and others. The proper context for understanding this, and the mania that is the Trayvonicus for that matter, is the reasonable fear of violence. This is the single most exigent fact here--yet you decree it must not be spoken. You admit the reason for taking the topic off the table is that it offends. In your logic the one necessarily follows the other. Rarely does anyone in your well-heeled (and easily brought to heel) mob address points of fact; rarely do you make a pretense of showing where this argument is wrong. Your "acceptable discourse" is defined by an appeal to consequences.

But you're right, of course. Our discourse is not a search for truth; it's a battle--not of ideas, for they aspire and are vulnerable to the truth--but for power.

Shame on you. People are dying. Worse still, you bore us. Good for Derbyshire.

*

Steve Sailer in same thread:

I'm proud to stand with Josh Barro and the Atlantic's Elspeth Reeve and Matt O'Brien. Simply because somebody is playing the role of a "public intellectual" doesn't give them a license to write about ideas. Yes, they should feel relatively free to think private thoughts as they wish. But the vibrant tapestry of our current public discourse -- which ranges from Trotskyist anarchy on the Left all the way to SWPL Portlandia on the Right -- can only be damaged by the voicing of divisive notions.

Another commenter:

Strongly disagree that Derbyshire's article was "appalling". I thought that word was reserved for ninnyish liberals who overheard someone defend George Zimmerman.

Personally I find the core values of NR--lowering taxes on the wealthy and spilling American blood for Israel--personally repugnant, even "appalling". So I'm non-plussed by your take on Derb's honest, intelligent Taki piece. Looking forward to the decline of National Review as a mouthpiece for pseudo-conservatism.

*The supposedly routine "Talk" about the danger of racist white cops. You've seen it on TV: solemn black parent, wearing the dignity of hundreds of years' suffering, tells doe-eyed children you got to look out for the Man always and be on your best behavior, because white folk just mean ("Mama, why do they hate us so?").
See Skip Gates (“All the hairs stood up on the back of my neck, and I realized that I was in danger");
Tyler Perry ("it took a black cop to realize I was a Celebrity and allowed to drive my car in any damn direction I please! Can you imagine the indignity?");
and Chris Rock.

It also occurs to me that we cannot trust that black parents actually are sitting their children down to instruct them in safe police protocol. After all, it doesn't seem to be working very well. Hatred of police is a jealously guarded romance in black American life. Who's to say young blacks aren't more often told by hard-headed elders not to take any shit from cops, or whites, or hispanics (or white-hispanics).

Religion affronts one's reason. Nature affronts one's soul.

Both affront one's ego.

Here Today

Righteous Constipation

Truth dons the Hoodie. You are sir, to paraphrase Epictetus (and parody you), a big ego carrying about a small man.

Heavenly Racket

Earl Scruggs Foggy Mountain Breakdown


Doc Watson, Earl Scruggs John Hardy

Sympathy for the Devil

So Mr. Santorum has invoked Satan. The pro-Romney Drudge Report is is assaulting this newly identified breach with standard all-cap hysterics and ominous cliff-hanger dramatics ("DEVELOPING..."). We're all atingle. Send the children to their rooms. Related, Obama is going pre-emptively negative on Romney in Michigan (Santorum's got to look like Christmas to the White House, and not because of the sweater-vests).

Apparently the only thing worse than questioning God's guiding affection for America is asserting the Devil's active malice for her. I don't understand.
That's American politics: it's all God, God, God, and all very glib; and when it isn't God, indeed, when it is specifically not God, it's the giddy god of Progress. Never a word for the Devil--politics refuses to acknowledge its father.

But what is Santorum guilty of, besides a gauche display of literal faith? Certainly Satan makes a good metaphor for our collective failure of character; it can be argued that some mortal few of us are energetically "attacking the great institutions of America, using those great vices of pride, vanity, and sensuality".

I think he's only being polite, not calling out by name the progressive agenda for America, which he may want to make nice with later. The Devil makes them do it. Does the Devil walk the halls of the Pentagon too, Rick? Or is he unable to get past security? Do the walls within emit a heavenly glow and the faint hum of castrati? Who is this Devil of yours, and how is he contained?

I rise in defense of Old Scratch. And why not? The Devil needn't lift a finger to enjoy our demise.

Get me something that goes really fast and gets really shitty gas mileage, I work for Dick Jones!

Contra kitschmeister Clint Eastwood, the dystopian Detroit of Paul Verhoeven's Robocop, a failed city where street gangs rule the night and private contractors compete with the police, is coming to pass:

"We got to have a little Old West up here in Detroit. That’s what it’s gonna take,” Detroit resident Julia Brown told The Daily.

The last time Brown, 73, called the Detroit police, they didn’t show up until the next day. So she applied for a permit to carry a handgun and says she’s prepared to use it against the young thugs who have taken over her neighborhood, burglarizing entire blocks, opening fire at will and terrorizing the elderly with impunity.

“I don’t intend to be one of their victims,” said Brown, who has lived in Detroit since the late 1950s. “I’m planning on taking one out.”
(...)
The city’s wealthier enclaves have hired private security firms. Intimidating men in armored trucks patrol streets lined with gracious old homes in a scene more likely seen in Mexico City than the United States.

That kind of paid protection can run residents anywhere from $10 to $200 per month, and companies say business is good.

“We’re booming,” said Dale Brown, the owner of Threat Management Group, which along with Recon Security patrols neighborhoods like Palmer Woods in black Hummers.

“We’re paramilitary, but we’re positive. I’m not a vigilante. I’m an agent of change.

. Somebody dial 911?

Public Enemy knew what time it was in 1990:



Sock it to the Man, Flav. How are black people with irony?

I can sure appreciate the irony of Detroit's last remaining law-abiding black citizens advocating for the right to bear arms--that "racist" legal relic, according Chicago's preening police chief and Candidate "clinging to guns" Obama. They level this charge oblivious to its converse: the law-abiding citizens of, say, rural Pennsylvania, are compelled to surrender a right they've held responsibly because of the failure of a feral few favored, by progressives, for their race. But the left will not concede even this; they'd have you believe the right never existed in the first place, than acknowledge they are in the business of destroying it.

Progressive logic insists none of us can have guns because Obama's homies can't resist shooting each other (and others) with them. But it's worse than that: they would deny us this means of self-defense against these same street thugs--on whose behalf progressives advocate generally, to the degradation of other customs, laws and conditions. Progressives want you to die. That's not fair, of course; it's just that some random innocent few of us must die, for justice to prevail. Your death is incidental.

"There was a theme park called Beat-Down..."

Well, thank goodness MLK's tearful little dears can now go to Fun Town. But do they have to bring their parents?
Oh racism. Why. Oh why.

Buyer's Remorse

Excuse my rudery, but stuff the jubilee!
--Carter the Unstoppable Sex Machine

Have they considered just putting a baton in his hand? They could replace the rolled-up paper, which makes him look like he's about to swat one of us for pissing on the rug.
Your more discerning lefty has to be uncomfortable with the Monster on the Mall. Can you blame him? It's too obvious, too much artistic and political overreach, with MLK emerging from Mother Earth like a primal deity--nothing to come before or after. Are they kidding? But tweaking the silly "drum major" quote--you've got to love it. It's like they've bought this big ugly car they have to keep forever and they're fiddling with the nameplate--because that's all they can do. Serves them right. We deserved better, though.