« Blizzard | Main | There’s not going to be a Republican candidate in 2016 as good as Romney »

November 07, 2012

Comments

Don't die Scalia and Kennedy. Hang on until 2016 when we...

elect a Republican.

hahaha.

We are screwed.

"Constitutional right to healthcare, a living wage, free college and graduate school education, anything else you can think of."

Oh, the horror!

The point is moot. SCOTUS is irrelevant to all those horrors, because they will be enacted legislatively or imposed by executive fiat.

JP is right IMO

Game's over boys, make a little money if you can but be looking for the exit

"They discovered a constitutional right to contraception. And then a constitutional right to abortion.."

So is the choice - No Free speech VS outlawed contraception? I kind of like both.

Whatever their legal reasoning, the Supreme Court will make some dumb decisions either way.

The Republicans lost the court for years yesterday. Maybe they don't care.

As for abortion - I'm pretty sure guys like Mitt are glad the SC took the issue off the plate.

The old Republican coalition is dead. Maybe something new will turn up. Too bad their are so many cranks in the Libertarian party.

6. First Amendment protection doesn’t apply to “hate speech.” And then this blog gets outlawed. The end.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Thoughtcrime does not entail death: thoughtcrime is death."

See you someday in the Ministry of Love.

"Constitutional right to healthcare, a living wage, free college and graduate school education, anything else you can think of."

Oh, the horror!

Posted by: Dr. Grzlickson

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

...for members of the favored and protected classes and their offspring...not for you.

Ok, so the plan is to let anyone who wants become a citizen and give them lots of free stuff. Might work for a few years until the country goes bankrupt and civil unrest breaks out. (Like Greece)

""Constitutional right to healthcare, a living wage, free college and graduate school education, anything else you can think of."

Oh, the horror!"

Healthcare like many other safety nets should be earned.

Living wage end up being inflated by unions to kill competitiveness, why do you think manufacturing is offshored and the quality of education is in the gutters?

Free college and graduate school education? Yeah, I'm sure another 4-6 years of liberal propaganda without actual learning of applicable knowledge and skills will contribute to a productive labor force.

Liberals are too dumb to understand hard science and use soft science to push PC/communism. When China calls in the debt and USA turns into EU/East Germany, you'll have no one but yourselves to blame.

'Citizens United" is hardly judicial restraint.

***Racial quotas for all desirable jobs, based on loose interpretation of existing civil ***

Marty Nemko's blog has some sobering posts on this and the impact of low skill immigration.

"Lest you think the reverse discrimination ends after admission, as a former faculty member at four universities including Berkeley, I know that my colleagues and I were pressured by minority activist organizations and administrators to give passing grades to minorities who did not deserve one.

That pressure even extends to life-critical medical education. Nine UCLA medical school professors urged that an African-American medical student be terminated from medical school because of poor performance. But the student made racial discrimination claims and to avoid the long, expensive lawsuit, and the race-card media campaign the student threatened to launch, the medical school has allowed the student to return.

Such problems accrued even in the landmark Bakke case, which paved the way for reverse discrimination admissions. Patrick Chavis, an African-American was the student admitted to UC Davis medical school instead of the far more qualified Alan Bakke. After Chavis graduated, Nicholas LeMann, in a New York Times Magazine cover story, proclaimed Chavis “the poster boy for affirmative action.” A few years later, however, it turned out that Chavis should have been the poster boy for anti-affirmative action. Instead of being the “physician who gave back to his community,” he opened a liposuction clinic and botched many. In one case, afraid of being discovered as incompetent, in the middle of the night, Chavis wheeled one of his patients out of the hospital, badly bleeding. The patient died. Chavis’ license was finally revoked.

"While less obvious, reverse discrimination is equally severe in the workplace. As a career consultant, in the confidentiality of my office, I’ve had dozens of senior employees tell me that Latinos and especially Blacks are hired and promoted over much more qualified Asians and Whites. They often are given plum positions with big salaries and fancy titles, but placed where, as one executive put it, “they can do no harm.”

In short, our racial guilt is resulting in less qualified people becoming our doctors, lawyers, airplane pilots, and executives. As a result the quality of everything from our telephone service to our health care is decreased."

http://www.martynemko.com/articles/why-america-is-dyingand-what-do-about-it_id1252

Nice tortured 1984 reference, Winston (clever with the name, too).

Lexus, just FYI, China owns very little of out debt, and they are in no position to "call it in". We are in the driver's seat in that relationship. Your other vaguely-recalled talking points don't merit a response.

"Constitutional right to healthcare, a living wage, free college and graduate school education, anything else you can think of."

Oh, the horror!

Posted by: Dr. Grzlickson

This is the standard liberal response. "What's so bad about those things? It would be such a wonderful world if those things were rights guaranteed to everyone."

No one disagrees that it would be wonderful if the world were populated entirely by educated, gainfully employed, middle/upper-middle class citizens who never worried about medical bills.

But only a fool believes that this world is anything but utopian fantasizing. When we conservatives balk at your liberal BS, we're not balking at the ideals. We're balking at the fact that you honestly believe those ideals will ever come to fruition. They won't. People who try to bring them to life end up mass murderers and war criminals.

Hey, greetings from the South. We're going to secede down here. We're not part of your culture. We're uneducated racists and full of hate so you don't want us anyway. We'll ship all the minorities, gays, and transgenders you want and you can all live happily ever after. Just let us know where you want them dropped off. Goodbye.

P.S.: Dr. Grzlickson, you're a complete idiot. You will not be welcome in our country.

I am from Richmond and would've fought for the South had I lived during that time. Where do you hail from?

I also don't care about gays or minorities, but don't let that change your preconceptions.

"Hey, greetings from the South. We're going to secede down here. We're not part of your culture. We're uneducated racists and full of hate so you don't want us anyway. We'll ship all the minorities, gays, and transgenders you want and you can all live happily ever after."

Awesome, does that mean your region will stop hoovering up federal subsidies like Lindsay Lohan in the ladies room at the Standard?

A lot of southerners reading this blog.

Georgia here.

My suggestion is to brew up the secession speak sooner rather than later. Most Northern Liberals would be happy to see us go. They don't want a war and they think we are dragging them down. They can crusade from the border but we can always let the gays and NAMs immigrate north.

Restrictions on speech -- Holmes' famous bit about shouting "fire" in a crowded theater -- originally applied socialists protesting one of the most pointless wars in history. It wasn't until the liberal court that free speech was taken seriously. Hell, it could be argued the First Amendment didn't mean much until you had incorporation in 1925 with GITLOW. The so-called liberals have generally extended individual freedom. It was Scalia who compared two dudes fucking to homicide.

In other words, your HBD blog will be fine. Free speech as money; anonymous donations in campaigns... maybe not so much.

Well, article three section two of the US constitution allows the Congress to revoke SCOTUS's jurisdiction over any case. The House could use this power to ban a rogue SCOTUS from being able to adjudicate on matters, though the House would only reach for the nuclear option if the court upheld restrictions on political speech.

Two words on Obama's opinion towards free speech - Cass Sunstein.

He's been closely affiliated with Obama for years, most recently serving the Obama regime as a low-level czar - Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.

Sunstein advocates legally silencing those who spread "conspiracy theories" and "hateful speech" questioning the government. He also advocates for extensive government control of politically-minded Websites.

"6. First Amendment protection doesn’t apply to “hate speech.” And then this blog gets outlawed. The end."

I'm feeling the hurt along with other HBDers about Romney's loss. It's especially unfortunate for us because we are normally so far ahead of the game.

But Romney's defeat has now forced mainstream conservative bloggers and editorials to ponder for the first time whether demographic changes doom them (although it appears it was weak conservative turnout that sunk Mitt). And there's little happy talk about how the minorities can be won over with amnesty and family values. The mainstream Republican commenters are talking about it in the gloomiest of terms suggesting their grappling with the reality that there is no way to win the non-white vote.

"Awesome, does that mean your region will stop hoovering up federal subsidies like Lindsay Lohan in the ladies room at the Standard?"

But blacks would starve and get no education if such a thing were to happen. Atlanta would be run by the KKK, just like Detroit!

I don't understand how anyone who believes in HBD can overlook the need to make abortion safe, legal, inexpensive and *accepted* everywhere. We're not there yet, but what we have, we have because of the liberals.

That, plus drastically curtail welfare to unemployed parents, and pretty soon the reasons for most of your other worries would evaporate.

Aren't you taking this panic and despair too far? The Obama win can be explained easily: first term inertia. Just as Bush Jr did, getting reelected isn't really an accomplishment at all, quite the contrary, some monumental political fail is needed to fail a second term. It's 30 years since the last time it happened.

Why should we put an ominous sign of irreversibility and doom to something that can easily be disregarded as people's inertia?

"Obama's opinion towards free speech - Cass Sunstein." - Cam

Agreed. Sunstein is extremely devious and dangerous. He also opposes the second amendment and he'll be emboldened now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYuWFm5T378

"Living wage end up being inflated by unions to kill competitiveness, why do you think manufacturing is offshored and the quality of education is in the gutters?" - Lexus Liberal

Education results are poor because the percentage of low IQ students is steadily rising. Teachers are trying to teach the uneducatable. White students in America actually do very well on the PISA exam.

The quality of education is fine, its just that we are trying to educate the uneducatable.

"They discovered a constitutional right to contraception. And then a constitutional right to abortion."

Any originalist knows that you have every negative right under the sun vis-a-vis the federal government unless it contravenes a power explicitly bestowed in the Constitution. The States were prohibited from infringing these rights via the Civil War-era amendments. It did take the undoubtedly unbiased minds on the Court a hundred years to realize what the words of the Fourteenth meant, but in the end they made the right call even if it was for the wrong reason, i.e. constitutionally sound rulings on what where effectively liberal social policy grounds.

"6. First Amendment protection doesn’t apply to “hate speech.”"

We have plenty of libs on the Supreme Court, and none of them support this position. The only sitting justice who supports restricting speech qua speech is Alito. Some of your other points I agree with: 'equal right to marriage' is a given once a certain number of states have mandated the practice. "If I reckon enough people think something is a constitutional right, it is" is a key to the jurisprudence of supposed conservative Justice Kennedy, see Roper v. Simmons. Court libs will have a field day with that until the end of time.

But sometimes, HS, I begin to doubt that you're a northern Jew. Then you make a post about the horrors of a liberal Court without mentioning the Second Amendment and I am reassured. A ruling that the Second doesn't mean what it says will come in a heartbeat when the liberals have a majority, unlike some of the fantasyland stuff you list above.

@Sheila Tone: Its possible that abortion could have a dysgenic effect depending on who gets them. I believe that is Steve Sailors argument. "Pro choice" is really "pro mother's choice" and is only eugenic in so far as women's preferences happen to align that way. It's a stupid idea both in the abstract and in its effects although it may be the better of the two mainstream options.

Curtailing welfare benefits to unemployed parents (e.g. letting poor children and their parents starve and live on the streets) is also a pretty terrible idea. We should transition welfare from a program that pays poor women to have children to one that pays poor men and women not to have children by expanding eligibility to the childless and attaching a long-term birth control requirement. But again this goes against "pro mothers choice" ideas.

[HS: I explained a zillion times that high-IQ women very rarely get accidentally pregnant. Thus abortion is eugenic.]

"The mainstream Republican commenters are talking about it in the gloomiest of terms suggesting their grappling with the reality that there is no way to win the non-white vote".


Yes, this is a sea change in our history and unlike other political changes this one is demographic and hence irreversible.
But the seeds of this were planted in the 70's and the republicans have turned a blind eye ever since. Gamblers ruin.

I don't know what will happen. Perhaps a more Libertian Republican party. Maybe the Democrats and Obama can be tricked into another disastrous war.
As for me, as I live in a NAM majority district, I'll eventually be voting for the conservative wing in the Democratic Primary.

"I don't understand how anyone who believes in HBD can overlook the need to make abortion safe, legal, inexpensive and *accepted* everywhere."

The problem is that it doesn't actually seem to change NAM fertility. I see the logic - if NAMs got more abortions, there'd be fewer NAMs - but empirically it doesn't seem to do anything.

Steve Sailer's argument is that legal abortion just causes women to engage in more unprotected sex, which causes more pregnancies and more abortions - it doesn't change the number of NAM pregnancies carried to term.

Only restricting NAM welfare actually cuts NAM birthrates - and that's exactly what you'd expect: NAMs have kids for the welfare, legal abortion isn't going to do anything.

Paying NAMs and proles to not have kids is also a good idea (ie. it's welfare for NOT reproducing), but it would be very difficult to actually implement.

[HS: You need to restrict NAM welfare PLUS give them the tools to abort pregnancies.]

Under a progressive regime, there´s no such thing as a "conservative" judge. Although some judges trend more to the right or left of the progressive spectrum.
And ultimately, all judges are appointed political Komissars. Face it, Siggie. I know the truth is painful.

"Steve Sailer's argument is that legal abortion just causes women to engage in more unprotected sex,"

I'd like to see some data on that. I seriously doubt the young low IQ population, of any race, has the foresight to think that far ahead when they're about to have sex. I think HS is right on this and abortion is eugenic.

"We have plenty of libs on the Supreme Court, and none of them support this position. "

The same thing could have been said about gay marriage 20 years ago. But once the Leftist Consensus favored gay marriage, liberal judges started finding a constitutional right to it.

Formally banning racist speech isn't that high on the Leftist agenda at the moment. But that could easily change and in fact is likely to change. It's just so tempting to wave the flag of anti-racism.

The only way to defeat a tyranny is to find new ways to break its laws without getting caught.

Peter A:

I'm inclined to agree that, net-net, abortion is eugenic. But I can see Sailer's point; he might be right, who knows. I'd like to see some figures too. Low-future-orientation people (ie. low-IQ people, mostly) by definition don't plan ahead, so I'm inclined to agree on that too.

"HS: You need to restrict NAM welfare PLUS give them the tools to abort pregnancies."

It can't hurt to have more abortions, but I doubt it helps much. It's the NAM welfare where most of the savings (monetary and civilisational) are.

(The non-monetary/psychological cost of abortion is probably bad, but I don't think I'd be alone in not caring what happens to prole and NAM women. If the psychological cost started to impact society, then it might be a problem worth worrying about, but I doubt that will ever be the case.)

Contraception is in the same bucket as abortion: it's not going to do much about NAM birthrates because NAMs have kids for the welfare. They're not going to abort or contracept their welfare away. Common sense tells us that NAMs will keep reproducing until the marginal annoyance of another kid (have you ever met a NAM who acted like she wanted kids?) outweighs the marginal value of another welfare dollar. Only at that point do they stop reproducing.

Cut the welfare off, and they have no reason to have kids.

So by all means, let's have an abort/contracept/cut-off-the-welfare three-prong attack on low-IQ/NAM fecundity. It's just that it's the last of the three that does most of the work.

"HS: You need to restrict NAM welfare PLUS give them the tools to abort pregnancies."

I thought "NAM" was to be replaced by "non-Asian minority" to avoid giving HBD a bad name.

[HS: A momentary lapse in a comment. All of my blog posts, going forward, will use "non-Asian minority."]

"The only way to defeat a tyranny is to find new ways to break its laws without getting caught."

The only way is to speak the truth.

Always.

Even if you are caught.

http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles/SolhenitsynLies.php

"Constitutional right to healthcare, a living wage, free college and graduate school education, anything else you can think of."

Oh, the horror!"

It'll be pretty horrific when we get the bill to pay for all of it.

The only way to make progress I think is for the right to re-prosecute stuff that the left thinks it has won. The left will fight all the time. It never stops. The best defense is a good offense.

Specifically:
(1) Say early and often that affirmative action is racist. It is illegal and wrong and needs to stop. Label the democrats as the party of racism over and over again on this.

(2) Attack low performance in inner city schools as a failure of Democrats. Many people know the real reason why Democrats can't talk say why so they can't defend themselves.

(3) Attack the low budget of Democratic parts of the country: Blue-governed states like California, Illinois and New York are struggling economically while red-governed states like Virginia and Texas are doing much better. Blue states are losing jobs while red states are gaining jobs in most cases.

As far as prosecution for free speech, bring it on. What is important is for the speakers to have the courage to fight and if necessary go to jail over free speech.

I would love to see the left try to keep political prisoners who speak their mind. Such people would become a victim and the best way to win in America is to be a victim.

Free speech restrictions on hate speech would not go over well, as far as I can imagine. Canada went overboard with that stuff and reversed course.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_complaints_against_Maclean%27s_magazine

The Jewish-heavy court of present I think favors free speech. Free speech is a Jewish cultural tradition. What after all is a Jew who is not allowed to argue?

The 'protection' is that reality now tilts conservative. In areas of economics, gender and sexuality, and human ethnic differences, Dems are in lala land. Dems in power will run into hard realities, including economic realities all on their own. There is only so much you can take in taxes if people don't want to work. Government can't create jobs, other nations will eventually stop lending to America and there will be nobody but Democrats to blame for the reckoning.

Productive people can and will exit the formal economy and focus their energies inward. No sense in being a big business leader in a country that frowns on that sort of thing.

Consider that formerly communist countries are least infected with PC, or that many permanently leftist nations such as Brazil have sensible economics.

Democrats are in charge and they will have to grow up.

Liberalism and especially PC thrives in rich countries. With less wealth, PC will diminish.

Birthrates of the poor are plummeting under Obama because they can't afford it. America faces an economic headwind that Romney could not fix. And even if he could, that would only give the welfare state more breathing room.

And more... half the time Dems pursue nonsense just to make war with Republics and win. This all-gay-all-the-time phase of American TV and media would have never happened if there weren't conservatives to make war with, since political war is the religion of the left.

The left will reach the promised land of total domination in politics and their stupidity will have to change. Look at how China's capitalism under the CCP is more raw than anything the West has seen in the last hundred years. (China now is more imperialist, capitalistic, nationalist, anti-egalitarian and immigration-restrictionist that almost any other nation on Earth). Look also at the brutal achievement of law and order in Democratic New York City and other liberal cities.

The left defines its agenda (gay marriage, the Dream act, permitting even sex-selective abortion that is banned the world over) based on administering maximum pain to the conservative enemy. Why else obsessively pursue gay marriage after 32 consecutive electoral defeats when the numbers are tiny and when the economy is in shambles? Without the right in opposition, the left actually can be fairly conservative. Liberal-dominant places are very tough on crime, engage in brutal zoning politics and are intensely segregationist and status conscious. The NYPD racially profiles to an extent impossible in any conservative place.

Lefties love being rebels and soiling conservative nests. When they conquer and the nest becomes their own, they are completely different:

http://takimag.com/article/life_imitates_arts_criticism/print#axzz2Be2EGwtJ

"How far will today’s white liberals go to cleanse poor blacks from the neighborhoods they crave? Pretty damn far, evidently. These aren’t inarticulate working-class whites who can be guilt-tripped and pushed around like it’s 1967. These whites are Obama voters."

HS - quotas for all desirable jobs would probably be a good thing. if disparate impact had a greater effect on elite occupations, there would be a lot more anger about it and it would probably get overturned. since it only hits good prole jobs like firefighters and cops, no one in power really cares.

[HS: Elite whites have already shown they don't care about racial quotas at elite colleges, so their elite jobs shouldn't be any different.]

re: "And then this blog gets outlawed. The end." HS

No, no, no! Not the end but the beginning. There will be blood.

Dan Kurt

The comments to this entry are closed.