« Sarah, Trig and Levi | Main | The truth about Ricky Perry's jobs »

September 21, 2011

Comments

It is true that Obama has nothing in common culturally or genetically with "African-Americans". His black African ancestors were never slaves, and come from a completely different part of Africa.

The idea that Obama can represent American blacks has always been a fraud, and a testimony to our national ignorance of HBD. If we could talk about HBD we would know that skin color is only a small part of what makes someone "black". If a half Arab-half Pole proclaimed himself the leader of America's Italians and Jews because they were all "white" and he was married to a girl from Sicily we would laugh him off the stage. That should have been our response to Obama.

Clinton does probably "get" American blacks culturally in a way that Obama never can.

Peter is only partly right. I do think Obama, although being "white washed" understands more than all other white presidential candidates what it means to be black in America. Sure his ancestors are from a different part of Africa, and he's a son of an immigrant. Sure Obama grew up around few blacks, but he himself is black and experienced the world as a black man. He experienced the prejudices that other blacks experience. Yes, Eminem is more culturally "black" than Obama, but Obama understands and can relate to black Americans more than any other white presidential candidate ever could including Clinton. At the end of the day however, politicians always proclaim they represent and understand the poor, weak or whatever, but oftentimes they are just lying, so what else is new?

Drole Prole,

I'm not buying the being half black in skin tone > anything else.

Didn't they used to call Clinton the first black President?

"It is true that Obama has nothing in common culturally or genetically with "African-Americans". His black African ancestors were never slaves, and come from a completely different part of Africa."

No his ancestors come from sub-Sahara; the same region of Africa that American blacks comes from. Genetic studies show that everyone from sub-Saharan Africa belongs to the same genetic cluster (negroid) with bushmen being the most divergent sub-group.

And Obama having a "pure" black father, is more genetically black than a lot of African American leaders such as Rev Wright who is not even black but an Afro-multiracial who looks to have 75% white ancestry.

I agree he's not culturally black because he was raised by whites, but who cares about culture? African Americans support Obama for the same reason Ashkenazi Americans support Israel (which is very different culturally from New York city): All populations are genetically programmed to help people who share their genes regardless of whether they share their culture.

[HS: Ashkenazi Jews support Israel because of Jewish solidarity created by the Holocaust, and the desire for a safe haven in case whatever country they live in becomes like Nazi Germany.]

"HS: Ashkenazi Jews support Israel because of Jewish solidarity created by the Holocaust, and the desire for a safe haven in case whatever country they live in becomes like Nazi Germany."

---

So, Sig, where exactly are gentile Whites supposed to go as Jews turn their homelands into multicultural hell holes?

[HS: Gentile whites are turning their own countries into hell holes, not Jews. According to the GSS, most Jews oppose affirmative action, for example.

Also, as some commenters keep pointing out, the Jews who vote for leftist Democrats don't care much about Israel. The pro-Israel Jews vote for Republicans.]

"His black African ancestors were never slaves": how on earth can you know that? Good Lord, there's a fair chance that some of his white ancestors were slaves.

[HS: Obama isn't descended from American slaves.]

HS: Ashkenazi Jews support Israel because of Jewish solidarity created by the Holocaust, and the desire for a safe haven in case whatever country they live in becomes like Nazi Germany
All right, let me get this: Israel is not really a country but a plan b for Jews?

It seems like what you really meant to say was that Barack Obama is the most SWPL president ever. That's not quite the same as being the "whitest" president ever. Engaging in SWPL habits could describe a lot of upper class blacks and mulattos. In terms of using his race to hustle special privileges for himself, Barack Obama is just as black as any West African-descended black in Congress.

HS: Gentile whites are turning their own countries into hell holes, not Jews. According to the GSS, most Jews oppose affirmative action, for example.

I've always assumed most things have an economic explanation. But I can't find an economic motive for importing tens of millions of high crime, low IQ immigrants. What do you think is driving this? I'm sincerely asking because I really don't know. There must be some mechanism.

On another note... Not to criticize you personally, but the way you put that was very frustrating. You're white and your family has lived in America for generations. But then you say, "gentile whites are turning their own countries into hell holes." Pardon me, but do you really consider yourself that detached from the rest of us? Jews are very proud of their success. Half the Forbes richest list is Jewish. Half the CEOs of American companies are Jewish. That suggests just an awful lot of influence. But then you say, "Oh, no. It's not us. Gentiles are doing it." I don't even know how to respond to something like that.

I'd nominate George H. W. Bush as the culturally whitest president.

Half Sigma,

I sent this to Steve Sailer as well. It was linked on the Business Insider website:

http://cis.org/immigrants-filled-most-new-jobs-in-Texas

Fully 81% of Texas state job growth from 2007 - 2011 went to newly arrived immmigrants (and 40% to illegal immigrants)!

Yes, globalism and neoliberal economics has been a disaster! And yes, the Republican Party (and the majority of Democrats) actually believe it. How does this happen?

Destructure: The economic motive for importing low IQ, high crime immigrants is that employers of them can privatize the benefits of having them in the country by hiring them and having low labor costs while shifting the costs onto the general public. The employers don't pay for the immigrants medical costs when they show up at the local hospital, they don't pay for the education of their children, they don't pay for the costs of increased law enforcement and prisons because of the higher crime rate etc. There's also a political motive in that high crime, low IQ immigrants will provide more votes for Democrats.
So big business Republicans support that kind of immigration for the cheap labor and Democrats support it for the additional votes.

Using Cavalli-Sforza's genetic distance charts and assuming that Obama is exactly half black and half white (which may not be true since black genes seem to be more dominant), Obama would be 70x more distant from whites than whites are from each other. Get that? He's 70x more distant. Whites would be more closely related to the Japanese (who are only 54x more distant) than to Obama.

Mark: The economic motive for importing low IQ, high crime immigrants is...

I agree. I've heard Buffet's quote about "Privatize the profits and socialize the losses". He wasn't talking about immigrants but I've put two and two together and made the connection. I just can't believe there's not more to it than that. Because not every industrialized country is undercutting it's workers. And not every country that uses foreign workers is doling out citizenship and benefits.

The comments to this entry are closed.