MEN'S NEWS DAILY HOME PAGE


Sunday, September 25, 2005

Bush League: New York Times' Letters Page Politics

by Nicholas Stix Being the New York Times’ lone Republican op-ed columnist comes with a price. On September 25, the Times published not one, not two or even three, but four letters attacking columnist, David Brooks. The letters editor gave the letters the collective title, “Still Outraged, and for Good Reason.” A Democrat donor had long ago coined a better one, albeit in a different context: “Still Crazy, After All These Years.” The correspondents wrote the sort of mindless, frothing-at-the-mouth rants that the Times has been monotonously publishing since November, 2000. (I’m just talking about anti-Bush II rants, as opposed to anti-Gingrich rants, anti-Bush I rants, anti-Reagan rants, anti-Nixon rants, anti-Ike rants, anti-Dewey rants, anti-Coolidge rants …) Now, I’m not even a fan of David Brooks, who is a pro-illegal immigration, pro-gay marriage, anti-Second Amendment, pro-War on Poverty II liberal Republican whom Pinch Sulzberger runs on the op-ed page so that he and his readers can delude themselves that the Times has a “conservative” columnist. And yet, even I couldn’t help but feel sympathy for Brooks, in the face of the Times’ mischief. Not counting five years (1980-1985) spent in West German exile, I have read the Times’ editorials and op-ed page intermittently since about 1974, during Russell Baker’s heyday. And since early 2000, like it or not, I’ve been a regular reader of those pages. The grind of reading the Times is part of my workday. Already during the 1980s, it became clear to me that the Times’ editors protected their leftwing and affirmative action op-ed columnists from criticism. Thus, readers could heap scorn on the paper’s lone liberal Republican columnist, William Safire, and see their words in print, but its leftwing/affirmative action columnist, the logically and factually-challenged Anna Quindlen could rest easy. (I once saw Quindlen on a late night talk show – Tom Snyder, I believe – bragging about being the first AA hire to win a Pulitzer Prize for commentary. What she failed to appreciate was that her Pulitzer was also an AA gift.) In recent years, Bob Herbert, Paul Krugman, and Maureen Dowd have likewise enjoyed such protection. (I’m not as sure about Nicholas Kristof.) Meg Stewart of Poughkeepsie, N.Y., wrote, “Thank you, David Brooks, for pointing out to us in ‘Kerry and Edwards, 2005’ (column, Sept. 22) how we all missed the boat in 2004. A narrow majority of voters helped President Bush squeak to victory over two thoughtful and outraged candidates. “I, too, am outraged at the state of our country and the mess Mr. Bush has made of it, so Senator John Kerry speaks for me and many of us when he expresses his outrage. It is real, Mr. Brooks, and it is not to be ridiculed…. “What I don't want to hear from conservatives is ridicule at my outrage. “What I want to hear, and have not, is ‘I'm sorry ... I'm just so sorry.’” Even if we left aside the debatable adjectives of “thoughtful” in referring to senators Kerry and Edwards, and “conservative,” in reference to Brooks, it is simply not true that President Bush “squeaked to victory in 2004.” And in case you thought that Meg Stewart was writing with tongue in check, think again. The lady is severely irony-deficient – just the sort of person who needs to be mercilessly mocked. Gary W. Priester, of Placitas, N.M., opens, “David Brooks plays the conservative hate card when he says, ‘Now we all know people so consumed by hatred for George Bush that they haven't had an unpredictable thought in five years. “We don't hate President Bush. We just hate that he has squandered the Clinton surplus and created the Bush deficit….” [Hate this, hate that, hate the other thing, but don’t hate the man.] Blah, blah, blah. We don’t hate the sinner, just the sin. Oops, but Gary Priester didn’t cite Scripture. I’m not sure it is humanly possible, without divine intervention, to have so much hatred toward the works of a person, without hating the person, too. (Even if the correspondent’s name is German for “priest.”) And when you consider that Priester would accuse Brooks of “play[ing] the conservative hate card,” just for observing Democrat hatred, well you’ve got some human, all-too-human hate at work here. (Imagine how Priester would react to a white writer complaining about black racism!) Douglas Gordon, of Brooklyn, mentions a sound argument from Brooks, only to refuse to acknowledge its point. Brooks pointed out that Kerry attacked Bush for not anticipating the failure of the levees, but that Kerry had himself made no such predictions. According to Gordon, being a Democrat means never having to say you’re sorry, while being a Republican means always having to say you’re sorry, which bring us back to Poughkeepsie’s Meg Stewart. You’d never know it from the leftwing rants the Times published, but Brooks’ column was a delightful comparison-and-contrast essay on the internecine struggle within the Democrat Party, as exemplified by Kerry and Edwards’ different speeches on Hurricane Katrina. Brooks’ argument was that Kerry’s speech spoke to the wing that is content to wallow in self-righteous, narcissistic rage, while Edwards’ speech spoke to those who seek to offer the voters new programs. “Kerry began his speech by making the point that Bush and his crew are rotten. He then went on to make the point that Bush and his crew are loathsome. In the third section of the speech, Kerry left the impression that Bush and his crew are evil. “Now we all know people so consumed by hatred for George Bush that they haven't had an unpredictable thought in five years, but in Kerry's speech one sees this anger in almost clinical form. [See Stewart, Meg; Priester, Gary; and Gordon, Douglas.] “In the first place, not even Karl Rove's worldview is so obsessively Bush-centric as John Kerry's. There are many interesting issues raised by Katrina, but for Senator Ahab it all goes back to the great white monster, Bush. Bush and his crew should have known the levees were weak. Bush and his crew should have known thousands in New Orleans would be trapped. (Did I miss Kerry's own warnings on these subjects?)…. “And as the speech stretches on, a second thought occurs: Doesn't this guy ever get bored? If Kerry ever makes an anti-Bush jab, he makes it again….” Well, I’ll say this for the folks at the Times, their readers, and John Kerry: They are nothing, if not consistent in their hatreds … and their irony deficiency. They remind all with eyes to see, why their standard bearer lost the 2004 election. And they permit, in their inchoate rage, George W. Bush and the GOP to get away with selling the American people short. After all, Bush & Co. need merely point at the world of the Kerry wing and the New York Times and say, “Hey, it’s us or the rabid dogs.”


Wednesday, September 21, 2005

Who's Stuck on Stupid? Lt. Gen. Russel Honore's Phony Candor

By Nicholas Stix Tonight I saw U.S. Army Lt. Gen. Russel Honore on Fox News telling reporters -- and one reporter in particular -- that they were "stuck on stupid" and fighting "the last hurricane," for asking him why he would want to use the New Orleans Convention Center as a gathering point for people escaping Hurricane Rita, after all of the problems that had arisen there following Hurricane Katrina. Now, a lot of conservatives surely got their jollies seeing a military man tell off reporters; I didn't. It's no accident that Gen. Honore is black; if a white general spoke that way to reporters, he'd have to publicly apologize for it, or put in his retirement papers. And Gen. Honore has a lot to answer for, regarding the hell that broke loose in the Convention Center and the "Terrordome." The National Guard troops that were at those sites, but who refused to restore order, were under Gen. Honore's command. Lt. Gen. Russel Honore's hands are covered in blood, and all the bluster and insults in the world won't wash that blood away. The same September 3 CNN article that reported that Gen. Honore had "[made] it clear that it was a humanitarian relief operation," as opposed to an operation restoring order, quoted New Orleans' black Democrat Mayor Ray Nagin calling the general a "John Wayne dude." Unfortunately, John Wayne was an actor, not a general. Gen. Honore has also been compared to Gen. George Patton Jr., America's greatest field commander in World War II's European Theater of Operations. Patton, whose Third Army steamrolled the Wehrmacht in France in the summer of 1944. About the only thing that Honore has in common with Patton is his distaste for reporters, and that merely puts him in the company of every other modern American general. Patton really was a general, he didn't just play one. Can you imagine Patton showing up somewhere in battle fatigues, announcing "This is a humanitarian relief operation"? As CNN reported on September 3,
Hundreds of National Guard and active duty troops are carrying weapons in the city. But the way they carried those guns was a concern to the general.

He ordered all he encountered to point their weapons down, said CNN Pentagon Correspondent Barbara Starr, who was with the general. Honore repeatedly went up to military vehicles, National Guardsmen standing sentry and even to New Orleans police officers, telling them to please point their weapons down and reminding them that they were not in Iraq.

That restraint and show of "respect" really impressed New Orleans' looters and shooters and rapists and carjackers and murderers. At the time, Gen. Honore did a photo op, helping out an exhausted mom who had been carrying two baby twins through the streets of New Orleans. He didn't call the reporters who indulged him with that propaganda op "stuck on stupid." He enjoyed being presented as a hero, without having done anything heroic. And now he's mad, because reporters are no longer sticking to the "John Wayne dude" script. Live by propaganda, die by propaganda. The good general needs to do his job, which includes imposing order, rather than trying to intimidate reporters for noting his failure to get the job done last time.


Saturday, September 17, 2005

Braves Lead 6-4; Piazza Gets a Measure of Revenge; Jacobs Follows in Kind

In the top of the secventh inning, the Braves lead the Mets 6-4, on a leadoff home run by second baseman Marcus Giles, off Mets reliever Shingo Takatsu. In the bottom of the fourth inning, Mets catcher Mike Piazza hit Tim Hudson's first pitch deep into the visitors' bullpen, to cut the Braves' lead to two runs. That was a measure of revenge for Piazza, who in the first inning was robbed of a two-run, two-out, bases-loaded single by the second base umpire, who ruled that Andruw Jones had caught Piazza's low liner, which in fact Jones had trapped. Mets' rookie Mike Jacobs smashed Hudson's next pitch out to right field, for his sixth home run. That cut the Braves' lead to one run.


Floyd Makes Things Close; Fan's Girlfriend Unimpressed

At the bottom of the second inning at Shea Stadium, Mets left fielder Cliff Floyd hit a two-out, two-run home run off Braves starter Tim Hudson, to close the gap against the Braves to 5-2. The lefthanded hitting Floyd hit a scorcher to the second tier in right field, which a fan of about twenty years of age caught with a brilliant, barehanded grab. Unlike the millions of TV viewers who saw the catch, the fan's girlfriend was utterly unimpressed. The home run was Floyd's thirty-first of the season, tying his career season high.


Rough Inning for Piazza; Umps Cause Three-Run Shift

Today's first inning at Shea stadium was plug ugly, especially for Mets' catcher Mike Piazza. With Marcus Giles stealing second base, Andruw Jones faked a bunt, in order to interfere with Piazza, who made a good, if barely late throw. As announcer Tim McCarver pointed out, since Jones had no intention of bunting, and only wished to obstruct Piazza, that should have been called interference, in which case Giles would have been called out. Giles then scored. The Mets' "deliberate" starter Steve Trachsel ended up throwing 31 pitches that inning, which ended with the Braves leasding 3-1, after a two-run homer by Adam LaRoche. Braves starter Tim Hudson then had his own meltdown, walking three men in a row with two outs. Then, with Piazza at bat and the bases loaded, on Hudson's 35th pitch of the inning, Piazza hit a low line drive to center field, that Andruw Jones short-hopped. Two Mets runners were on their way in to score, but Jones, who acted as though he had caught the ball cleanly, conned the umpire, who called Piazza's hit a catch for Jones. And so, instead of a 2-2 tie, with men on first and third, and Tim Hudson losing it, the score was 3-0, with the Braves coming up to bat to start the second inning, and Hudson back in control. Piazza, the greatest offensive catcher in major league history, who is almost surely in his last season with the Mets, on September 10 had come back from yet another of his many injuries in recent years, a broken bone in his hand, after three and a-half weeks out, only to be beaned by St. Louis reliever Julian Tavarez out of apparent revenge for a home run Piazza had hit in his first at bat, against Cardinals starter Jeff Suppan. To add insult to injury, the Mets lost that game, 4-2.


Monday, September 12, 2005

Letters from New Orleans

By Nicholas Stix I received this letter from a resident of the New Orleans area on the night of September 11, in response to my column, “New Orleans, and the Hurricane Next Time.” “Dear Mr. Stix: “Truly profound. I am a long time resident of New Orleans actually Terrytown which is right across the river from New Orleans. Once a wonderful place to live, the last 25-30 years New Orleans has become an increasingly dangerous place to live. You have no idea how disappointing that is. “How our local politicians didn't expect the aftermath of Katrina is beyond me. These are the people that are supposed to be in touch with the city and its people. “My disappointment lies in that we (my boyfriend and I) prepared for the hurricane and because my boyfriend was in Andrew several years before knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that there would be looting and it would be terrible because our beautiful city plunged in to such disarray for the last several decades. He was approached while sleeping in a tent by someone trying to loot our home. Thankfully, there was a dog that adopted him and dog gave him just enough time to retreive his side arm and cock the hammer, only then did the potential intruder back off. It scares me to death that he could have lost his life because some stupid individual wanted what we had. “I just don't understand the mentality of people that live off the system their entire lives and then bitch because the system didn't provide them with the resources to get out of the city. What is really screwed up is that the people that were evacuated to the Astrodome and other shelters were given money by Red Cross & FEMA and told the rest of the evacuees that they would have to wait for any help if any was going to be given. When New Orleans is rebuilt and it will be, these same people will have their hands out so they can return to the Crescent City, we don't want them, do you? “You may be asking the point to my email. I am tired, especially in New Orleans, of people with their hands out all of the time. I don't expect the Federal, State or even City government to bail me out of my situation. Why should we continually support people that won't do anything for themselves??? And why are they so angry with white people? “Sincerely, “(Name deleted)” Then, on the morning of September 12, I received the following letter from a New Orleans resident, in response to my column, Questions That May Not be Asked about New Orleans.” (The only change I made in the letter below was to break it up into paragraphs; as sent to me, it was only broken into two paragraphs, and might make readers go blind. And I want people to read it.) “Dear Mr. Stix, I wanted to thank you for your article. It said everything my family and I have been trying to say. You see, sir, I am a New Orleans Refugee, that's right a refugee. My family and I watched the hurricane updates and moved to higher ground. We are not offended to be called refugees. ”We are staying with family in another part of the state. The hurricane hit on Monday, on Tuesday the parish that we are staying in announced that it would take "displaced students" into it's schools. On Wed, we had our children enrolled in local schools. On Tues, my husband notified his company, Halliburton, that we needed to relocate. They set up a temporary place for him to work in Lafayette. He drives an hour and an half both ways every day to work. That's right, Work! 3 hours every day, just to work! My elderly mother-in-law had to be evacuated with us. Therefore, I get the kids to school, took care of her and seek work in the area. “We have driven home 3 times to check out the damage, secure what we can and obtain items that we need. It takes 8-10 hours every time. But we want to make sure that our home is taken care of until we can get there to fix it. That's right, we plan on doing it ourselves with the insurance money. Yes, we have homeowners and flood. You see sir, we live in an area where hurricanes can at hit at any time. Therefore, we must take care of ourselves. We do not plan on waiting for the government or city to fix it. It is our responsibility to make sure that we have a home, work and that our children are educated. “But I want to make one thing perfectly clear. We live paycheck to paycheck. My husband has been with Halliburton for 32 years. I am a nurse, I work full time and take call. We have three children. We have provided them with private school education because they do not know how to use guns and would get eaten alive in our public school system. Also, we have friends that have graduated in our public school system and can't read. We have a 19 year old in college, a 15 year old in the 9th grade and a 13 year old in the 7th grade. “Yes, we live paycheck to paycheck. But we do not expect anyone else to provide us with the things that we need. We provide ourselves and children with health insurance. We pay for their braces and eyeglasses. You see sir, we work for these things. Our biggest hope is that our children will realize this and work for things that they need and desire. We vote, we take our children with us. We want them to understand that they have to be active in their community. We have them do community service work with us. All the time being blamed for the condition of our black community. Well, the true black community came through in this situation. Remember the black out in New York, thousands of people just walked out. No one shot at the crowd, no one attached rescue workers. They just moved on. I am ashamed of how my city reacted to this tradgey. But I refuse to take responsibility. My family reacted the way human beings should react. We heeded the warnings, got out and took care of ourselves. But we are white, cajun all the way through. We work for what we have. We will teach our childred to do the same. Just as our parents taught us. I am not sure what will come of our home, but I promise this, we will be a part of the rebuilding, not the destruction. Thanks for listening. And please, pray our city and all of the hurricane victims. We need it. ”Sincerely, A New Orleans REFUGEE!” That afternoon, the following letter came about the same essay. “Good questions!!. Most will not be answered. You will be labeled a racist, and the "beat will go on". Keep on trying to change the system. Democrats do not want to upset their supporters and others fear being destroyed by the liberal media and black racists like Sharpton and Jackson. “P.S. I'm a refugee (I'll use this term because of its definition) and grew up in the LOWER 9th WARD. I chose to learn something in school and rise out of the poverty of the area. Unfortunately, my mother still has a house (maybe) there. Of my entire family including hundreds of cousins, I'm one of the first to get a college degree. I'm tired of hearing about poor people. Most, by choice, do not want any other way of living unless they can steel it or are presented it by someone else!!!” Fifty minutes later, a woman sent me the following note. “Great article! “I am from New Orleans and I could answer all of these questions...but of course, I won't because they weren't asked.!” The letters reminded me of when our son was born, five years ago. We lived in a 20' X 8' room (including kitchenette and bathroom!) so tight that I once had my back pants pocket shredded by pointy, formica dresser drawers, when I squeezed between the baby's crib and the dresser, in order to get to the bed. The wiring, which was not up to code, made the place a firetrap. My wife worked part-time, while going to nursing school full time, while I took care of the baby 24/7. In other words, we didn’t have a pot to pee in. And yet, had we heard that a natural disaster was on the way, we would have grabbed the stash of cash my wife kept on hand (where only she could find it) for emergencies, wrapped up the baby, packed a couple days' changes of clothes for us, and a week's worth of baby supplies (including app. 80 Pampers), and grabbed the first train or bus out of town. It would never have occurred to us to stay, and demand that the federales come, save us, and give us money. Of course, seeing as we are only human, had the feds chased after us with fists full of money, we might well have let them catch us. Then again, unlike God, the feds only help those who refuse to take care of themselves.


Sunday, September 11, 2005

Four Years Later

By Nicholas Stix Insecurity Do you feel any safer now than you did four years ago? It sounds like a campaign slogan, dun’it? Well, do you? You probably do, if only for psychological reasons: No human being can continue feeling the way Americans felt four years ago for any amount of time, without suffering a psychological meltdown. Otherwise, all of America would look like … New Orleans. And in some ways, we probably are safer, no thanks to the federal government. Al Qaeda may at the time have had a few bright logistics people, but the fact that the group was composed of Arab aristocrats notwithstanding (or more likely, because the group was composed of Arab aristocrats), it had very little bench strength. After it blew up its frontline murderers on 911, the group that remained proved to be dominated by imbeciles. Not that the federal government didn’t bend over backwards to aid and abet AQ. Rather than profiling young, Arab men, airport security focused on harassing white grandmothers, octogenarian Medal of Honor winners, and fondling attractive younger women. But racial profiling was definitely in effect: Non-white security screeners were targeting white passengers for abuse, and ignoring potential terrorists. And rather than upgrade airport security, which was supposedly the point of the exercise – you know, so we wouldn’t have any more 911s -- George Bush yielded to pressure from the likes of Democrat Sen. Chuck Schumer from New York, to turn the program into a racist welfare program. And so, rather than firing the dunces dominating airport security, and replacing them with literate, intelligent, English speakers, the government retained the dunces, doubled their salaries, gave them luxurious benefits where before they had had none, and made them Federal Workers. According to Schumerian (as opposed to Sumerian) political science, if you raise an incompetent’s salary, and make him a Government Employee, his work performance will magically improve. Apparently, George Bush agrees. The initial Transit Security Administration plan was to require that every screener have a high school diploma. However, when it turned out that many of them did not have diplomas, and Schumer, Bush, et al., decided that the real purpose of the program was not to protect Americans and other travelers, but to put as much money as possible into the pockets of minority group members, especially immigrants, even that requirement was trashed, in favor of “work experience.” But as Israeli security guru (formerly of El Al) Isaac Yeffet said of the screeners, “They have experience – the experience of failure!” Yeffet emphasized that people too slow to even get a dumbed-down high school diploma are simply too dim to be trainable for the job at hand. George Bush proved his commitment to upgrading airport security by retaining incompetent, racist Democrat holdover Norm Mineta, who over sixty years later is still trying to get even with all whites for the white federal officer who confiscated his baseball bat when the Mineta family was sent to a World War II internment camp. In the wake of 911, the newly created Transportation Security Administration was supposed to protect air travel. But as Michelle Malkin has written, the TSA turned into a multibillion dollar black hole of waste, corruption, and incompetence. “It's difficult to determine when the TSA stooges undermine homeland security more: when they're asleep on the job -- or when they're awake.” Meanwhile, according to a report cited in May by Veronique de Rugy, private airport screeners do a much better job at a much lower cost than TSA screeners. In New York, briefly after the London bombings, police were checking the bags of every fifth subway rider seeking to board trains in Manhattan. (I went to Manhattan about two weeks ago, and the practice was no longer in effect.) I’m not sure they were checking the bags of young Arab men, even when they were the fifth person. All an Arab homicide bomber would have to have done to kill everyone on a subway train would be to … look like an Arab homicide bomber. As in bearded, with a swarthy, Arabian complexion, wearing a heavy coat on a summer’s day, with lots of objects creating lumps around his middle and upper body, and maybe for good measure, muttering “jihad” and “Sheik bin Laden” to himself in Arabic. The NYPD officers, trained for years in “diversity seminars” to look away from individuals who fit criminal profiles and fight off their own judgment and experience, wouldn’t dare pull over someone who looked like a terrorist. That would be “racist.” In such a situation, after letting the terrorist pass onto the train unmolested, an officer might search the line for the most All-American, masculine-looking white guy he could find, and mercilessly hassle him, until the explosion knocked the cop onto the ground. As Steve Sailer has pointed out, prior to 911, Bush had refused to employ sensible security measures to protect us from Arab terrorists, because he was courting Arab political support which, as Sailer noted, amounted to half of one percent of the electorate. Call it the Norquist Doctrine, after the influential GOP political strategist who, according to Daniel Pipes, recently married a “Palestinian” Islamist (who has a cushy federal job), and apparently converted to Islam, and who is suspected by Paul Sperry of himself being an Islamist. That’s the good, old GOP, keeping us all safe and snug. No wonder Mencken christened it “the stupid party”! The North American Union Then there’s border security, or the lack thereof. George Bush says that he puts protecting America first, yet he wants to eliminate American sovereignty. As millions of illegal immigrants – including young, Arab males -- continue to stream across the Mexican border, Bush is still pursuing his stealth amnesty in ways that show ever more contempt for the intelligence of the American voter. The most recent outrage was in having GOP pollster, Matthew Dowd, us last month on the op-ed page of the New York Times, in effect, that if we let illegal immigration go for another 20 years, Mexico will run out of Mexicans to send us. (Translation: In 20 years, we’ll have accepted illegal immigration. This was the application of the O’Connor Maneuver to immigration policy, named after Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who in her 2003 Grutter v. Bollinger decision called on America to accept affirmative action for another 25 years, at which point she apparently believes, no one will be able anymore to do anything about it.) Bush’s ongoing policy of supporting the Invasion of the Techie Snatchers has dangers even beyond the destruction, as Paul Craig Roberts has repeatedly warned, of America’s technological corps, her system of higher education, and her economy. As the knowledge essential to run the systems on which the American economy and American security are based falls increasingly into the hands of underpaid foreign help who have no political allegiance to the U.S., that help will be tempted to engage in industrial sabotage and espionage, in furtherance of their own political and economic interests. The American engineers and scientists whom Bush and American corporations have betrayed and replaced with cheaper foreign help via H-1B and L-1 visas and offshoring, will also be tempted to visit their wrath on American corporations and the American government. The War over the War Well, at least there’s the war. Oops. The majority of Americans are now fed up with the war, and skeptical that fighting Arabs in Iraq is keeping us from having to fight them at home. I supported going to war against Saddam Hussein before the war, and see no reason to change what I said then. I never supported Bush’s Wilsonian rationale that we must spread democracy throughout the world. I saw the war in Iraq: 1. As a proxy war, in place of the one we needed to lead against our primary enemies in Arabia, the Saudis; 2. As necessary to assert ourselves in Arabia; and 3. In order to finish Gulf War I, which since Saddam had violated the peace conditions from the get-go, had never ended. However, the war has not gone well, and that is not good for American security. There are six reasons for that poor showing: 1. Bush has accepted so much of multicultural doctrine and practice, that he cannot possibly succeed in the long run in Iraq. Democracy requires cultural homogeneity; multiculturalism is the doctrine of racial and ethnic civil war, as means to the end of installing an anti-western dictatorship in a given country. 2. As I have previously written, in a situation of war, rebellion, and/or looting, order must be imposed immediately. That means immediately shooting and killing looters, and imposing martial law (both of which are pretty much simultaneous, since no looter will believe that martial law has been imposed, until he sees his other looters getting shot down like dogs), and letting the whole world know about it. Bush went in the opposite direction, afraid – as per multicultural practice -- of the Arab world seeing images of American soldiers gunning down Arab looters. 3. MTV-Style Tempo: You can sometimes impose democracy at the point of a gun – indeed, there is no other way to impose it -- but it takes time. After World War II, we imposed democracy at the end of a gun in West Germany and Japan, but we took our own sweet time at it. Unlike in Iraq, where we handed over sovereignty barely one year after laying low the Iraqis, we didn’t hand over sovereignty to the Germans until 1950, and made the Japanese wait until 1952. And we didn’t refer to them as the “Germans” and “Japanese,” either. We weren’t concerned about their feelings or dignity or sense of humiliation. We engaged in ruthless de-Nazification (and the Japanese equivalent) and re-education, and relentless propagandizing in the national and local press of the countries we occupied. And the hand-over of sovereignty in those countries was merely symbolic. We kept tens of thousands of servicemen in each country for years thereafter, and the locals knew just what those Americans were there for, even if American politicians wouldn’t say so. (In West Germany, in particular, as one local told me, the American troops were there to quell any rebellions that might arise. He didn’t see our boys as there to protect the Germans from the Russkies, but then, he was a communist. The US troops were in fact there to protect against enemies, both internal and external.) But George Bush gave in to pressure to do a quickie democracy in Iraq. No can do. 4. Bush fell for the notion, propagated by ‘60s Lefties – most of whom never believed what they were saying – that democratic ends can only be achieved via democratic means. But no democracy ever came about democratically! If the Founding Fathers had given all of the colonists a vote in the matter, today we’d be saying, “God save the Queen!” Our democratization projects in West Germany and Japan succeeded precisely because both were imposed undemocratically. (And it didn’t hurt that both nations were racially and culturally homogenous.) 5. Iraq will end up either in the hands of another bloodthirsty dictator, or cut up into at least three sections: Shiite, Sunni, and Kurdish. I fear that the Bush Administration will perpetuate the tradition begun by his father of betraying the Kurds, the only people who understand self-government and have any value in Iraq. 6. My criticisms of George W. Bush notwithstanding, fairness demands that I cite as well his handicap of prosecuting a War on Terror in the face of a media and political Fifth Column which has sought to cause America to lose the war from the get-go. Given so many claims by media and political types that the problem is the War in Iraq, as opposed to the War in Afghanistan, many readers may have forgotten that most of the same people – most notoriously Arthur “Pinch” Sulzberger Jr.’s New York Times -- said the same things (“quagmire”) before we went into Afghanistan that they said before we went into Iraq, in order to discourage Bush from retaliating against those who had launched the worst attack ever on American soil. The American Left has decided that only socialist presidents may prosecute wars, and that they will use every means, fair or foul, legal or illegal, to destabilize any Republican president who wages war on any enemy for any reason. That clear if unstated Democrat position has put Bush in a bind. If he pulls out of Iraq any time soon, the Democrats will clearly have won the War over War. If Americans voters see warmongering as the exclusive prerogative of the Democrat Party, they will cease to respect, and thus cease voting for, the GOP. The Jewish Question Many observers have claimed since before the War in Iraq, that the chief winner of such a war would be Israel. This claim is just as dumb and incredible as it was when it was first promoted at least three years ago. Israel’s status in America has two bases: “Never Again” and as the only democracy in the region. “Never again” refers, of course, to the need to prevent a second Holocaust. Many American Jews have invested a great deal of time, money, and political capital towards preventing a second Holocaust (while many other American Jews, something that anti-Semites will never understand, have invested a great deal of time, money, and political capital towards bringing about a second Holocaust). Israel‘s status as the region’s only democracy would end, were a democratic Iraq to succeed. (The claim that we are fighting the War in Iraq just to help the Jews, er Israelis, was initially promoted by anti-Semites, but has since been adopted by some folks who are not anti-Semites, but who have spent too much time reading the work of anti-Semitic colleagues. In this situation, I tend to overdose on irony, since some of my closest associates are gentile anti-Semites. I have enjoyed much more support from gentile anti-Semites than I have from Jewish anti-Semites.) In any event, if George W. Bush were a puppet on a string controlled by Israeli interests, Ariel Sharon would never have pulled out of the Gaza Strip. It was George W. Bush’s pressure that caused the Israeli government to act against its own vital interests, without ultimately benefiting American national security, since the Arabs hate us as much as they do the Jews of Israel. And a man who was a prisoner of ideology would not have an Al Gonzales sitting at his right hand. Four years after 911, America is much the poorer, but no safer than she was early on that beautiful, fateful morn.


Wednesday, September 07, 2005

Questions That May Not be Asked about New Orleans

By Nicholas Stix In journalism as in academia, the most important questions one has to learn are those which one may not ask. For instance, back in April on Bob Costas’ HBO sports show, football announcer Chris Collinsworth, a white, retired Cincinnati Bengals wide receiver, stuttered and stammered as he said that he is so nervous about touching professionally on race in any way, because it could instantly end his announcing career, that he is afraid to ask any race-related questions. In grad school, I was always struck by how some of my classmates knew exactly what questions not to ask. I wondered if someone was handing out fliers that I wasn’t receiving. One question that nowadays may never be asked in academia is, “Why, if black IQs are on average 15 points lower than white IQs, and the Constitution forbids unequal treatment under the law, would the government routinely hire people based on their being black, rather than based on their being qualified?” It’s a non-question; no one may ask it. Forget that you even read it here. In that spirit, I have a compiled a series of “non-questions” regarding New Orleans. They only appear to be questions but aren’t, because no one may ask them. I am not asking them; thus, no answer is expected. I am merely listing them as a public service, so that everyone will know what he may not ask. 1. Why were New Orleans residents shooting at rescue workers in helicopters and boats, and firing on the contractors who were trying to fix the levee? 2. Why were so many thugs shooting and looting and raping and murdering (and carjacking) on the streets of New Orleans and at the Superdome when a natural disaster hit town? 3. Is it true that the thugs who were shooting and looting and raping and murdering and carjacking were just doing what they do all time in “the Big Easy”? 4. Why were virtually all of the looters and shooters and murderers and rapists and carjackers black? 5. Since it is a well-known fact that blacks can only be the victims, but never the perpetrators of racism, should we damn as racists the white and Asian foreign tourists who said they were being terrorized in the Superdome and on the streets of New Orleans based on the color of their skin, ignore their complaints, “disappear” alleged black-on-white and black-on-Asian crimes committed in the aftermath of Katrina, and arrest the tourists for racial insensitivity and hate crimes? 6. Why didn’t New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin use the 500 or so school and city buses he had at his disposal to evacuate New Orleans residents before Katrina hit town? 7. Is President Bush getting so roundly criticized by the media and black political activists for not taking over rescue efforts sooner, because he is a white, heterosexual, Republican male, whereas Mayor Nagin is a black Democrat and Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco is a female Democrat? 8. Had Pres. Bush, in the face of Mayor Nagin and Gov. Blanco’s incompetence, taken over rescue efforts days ago, would the President now be enduring the same criticisms he is now receiving, or worse criticisms? 9. Although thousands of National Guard troops have been in New Orleans for several days, how come we have not heard of any of them shooting looters or violent criminals? 10. Why have we heard instead of New Orleans thugs beating National Guardspersons over the head with pipes, shooting National Guardspersons, and of wounded National Guardspersons running away from said attackers? 11. Are the National Guardspersons’ rifles loaded with live ammunition? 12. Is it possible that, as with during and after the 1992 Los Angeles race riots, thousands of National Guardspersons are marching around New Orleans with unloaded weapons? 13. How can federal authorities such as FEMA take over the role of first-responders, as critics of the feds have implied they should have, if the police and fire persons are all locals, and it takes days for FEMA to arrive on the scene? 14. If everything to do with New Orleans’ troubles is a federal affair, should not the federal government put the city in federal receivership, and render Mayor Nagin and Gov. Blanco powerless, regarding the city’s management? 15. Should we ignore the New York Times’ years-long, successful opposition (including just last spring) to the feds spending billions of taxpayer dollars to fix New Orleans’ levees, in light of the newspaper’s current charges of federal negligence for not having fixed the levees? As I said at the outset, the above sentences are non-questions. They are not to be asked, let alone answered, least of all by yours truly. They are all off-limits – if you know what’s good for you! In fact, forget you ever read this column.


Tuesday, September 06, 2005

Florida 2000, Again: Times’ Paul Krugman Keeps Hoax Alive!

By Nicholas Stix There he goes again! Paul Krugman is still repeating the Big Lie of 2000 – that Republicans stole the presidential election by suppressing the black vote in Florida. If Krugman is right, the GOP must also have exercised mind control over or bought off Democrat election officials in Palm Beach County, when the latter designed the butterfly ballot that confused many voters. The GOP must also either have bought off or exercised mind control over the black Democrat activists who illegally entered polling places and went up and down lines of black Democrat voters, exhorting them, “Vote on every page!” and who in some polling places illegally handed black voters fliers, telling them whom to vote for. Since the presidential candidates covered more than one page, those voters illegally voted for two candidates, thus invalidating their votes. My letter to the Times follows below. To the Editor: Paul Krugman’s September 2 “correction” was truly amazing. He wrote, “… the recorded vote was so close that, when you combine that fact with the effects of vote suppression and ballot design, it becomes reasonably clear that the voters of Florida, as well as those of the United States as a whole, tried to choose Mr. Gore.” Almost five years after the myth of the GOP theft of the 2000 election in Florida was refuted, Krugman is still repeating the old, discredited lies. No evidence was ever provided that the Florida vote was suppressed in 2000. After the NAACP claimed to have thousands of affidavits from black Florida voters who claimed their voting rights had been violated, Mary Frances Berry of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission convened hearings on the suppression of black voters. Not one of those thousands of affidavits materialized. The NAACP had lied. And only three black Florida voters showed up to testify, none of whom testified that their voting rights had been violated, or that they knew of anyone else’s voting rights having been violated. As for the ballot design issue, the ballot was designed by Democrat officials. Hence, if Democrat voters’ wills had been thwarted, they were thwarted by officials of their own party. But there is no more evidence today that Florida voters’ wills were thwarted, than there was in 2000. Mr. Krugman has distinguished himself yet again, in keeping hoax alive! Nicholas Stix I violated the Times’ limit of 150 words, but that’s beside the point. The Times hasn’t published any of my letters to the editor since 1997, in spite of my having sent them about 100 during that time, virtually all of which kept to the word limit. Besides, if the letters editor wants to run a letter, he reserves the right to cut it down. Since I know the Times won’t publish any of my letters, and I planned on publishing the one above on the ‘Net, I also didn’t censor myself by refraining from using the “l” word, as in Krugman and the NAACP lied.


Sunday, September 04, 2005

The Shooting on the Bridge: What Really Happened?

By Nicholas Stix 8:14 p.m., EST Did New Orleans police shoot and kill contractors who were walking across a bridge to inspect and seek to fix the broken levee, or did they kill those who had fired on the contractors? A few hours ago, news services and networks reported that five or six contractors had been shot and killed by the NOPD. Shortly thereafter, news services reported that the NOPD had actually shot “thugs” as a (Fox News host described them) who had fired on the contractors. I do not know what happened, and am not assuming that the revised story is the true one. This is the first time I have heard of police or National Guard soldiers shooting anyone. For days, I have heard stories of black criminals firing on rescue crews in helicopters and boats, on police, and shooting and bludgeoning National Guard troops. One National Guardette ran away from the armed criminal who had hit her over the head with a pipe, and had shot her comrade. Did the Guardette even have a loaded weapon? My expectation was that the police or soldiers would shoot a non-violent white or Asian, before they would shoot an ultraviolent black, but I was beaten to the punch by blogger Zach at Our Way of Life, who predicted Friday, “If anybody gets shot for looting, they will be white or asian. Just remember you heard it here first.” The current report on the bridge shooting at Fox News is only 14 words long. “Hurricane relief efforts turn toward the gathering of bodies; police report shooting eight armed men on New Orleans bridge, killing at least five.” In what sort of hellholes do people try to murder rescue crews, and people trying to fix broken levees? In America’s third world cities, that’s where. In the South Bronx in New York City, twenty years ago, Hispanic thugs used to attack fire engines speeding to put out fires with Molotov cocktails. Of course, it was white men putting their lives on the line to save Hispanics and blacks. Just like in New Orleans these days, apparently. Considering how the mainstream media are doing their best to suppress the stories from coming out of New Orleans, I wonder if we’ll ever find out anything approaching the whole sordid truth.


Saturday, September 03, 2005

New Orleans, and the Hurricane Next Time

By Nicholas Stix A hurricane hit New Orleans. However, America has suffered many such hurricanes, and will suffer many more to come. Whether she can endure them, is another story. Looks like America to Me ‘It doesn’t look like America; it looks like a third world country.’ That was the refrain from CNN reporters such as Sanjay Gupta in New Orleans on Friday. The problem is, New Orleans looks all too much like America – as in urban, “multicultural” America. Meanwhile, black politicians were saying that the issue is “racial.” You have a majority black city whose 480,000 residents were warned to evacuate, yet approximately 150,000 (31.2 percent) declined to. (I am allowing for 10,000-20,000 old and/or disabled people, like the 94-year-old man stuck in his apartment with a dozen eggs and a few gallons of water, who could not evacuate.) Most of the angry people shown waiting for transport appeared to me to be able-bodied. You have armed young black men roaming the city streets, looting, raping, murdering and carjacking. You have rescue workers in helicopters who are fired on by gun-toting “victims,” and who then flee to save themselves. You have national guardsmen in the streets ordered not to do their jobs. You have a black mayor, Ray Nagin, who failed to do his job and then cried racism, condemning the Great White Father for not bailing him out, and complaining about a lack of National Guardsmen, as if he would tolerate the Guard doing its job. You have Jesse Jackson, crying racism, insisting that had the victims been white that help would have arrived in a hurry, and diminishing the savagery in the streets as a few people taking “TV sets.” You have socialist media opportunists racially pandering to racist, black demagogues. You have smirking, effete snob Los Angeles Times editorialist Jon Healy, claiming that the omniscient, omnipotent feds knew exactly what to expect, and should have responded with lightning speed to avert disaster. You have CNN anchor Paula Zahn, attacking the Bush Administration, by way of feeding black politicians rhetorical softball questions. You have Larry King, “asking” racist Cong. Elijah Cummings, former chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, “Do you think if New Orleans were two-thirds white instead of two-thirds black, this wouldn’t have happened?” Those weren’t questions, they were despicable cases of racist grandstanding. To Cong. Cummings’ credit, he sought to de-emphasize race, emphasizing instead that these were poor people “with no money, and nowhere to go.” A black woman named Kesha Booker said that the people who stayed in New Orleans “are living paycheck to paycheck, in dire straits.” And yet, during the Great Depression, whites who had no jobs, no paychecks, and nowhere to go, traveled cross-country, in search of work. And they hadn’t even been warned to evacuate in the face of an approaching hurricane. And you have white doctors and nurses saving black patients, and a white president who is expected to save the day. And then be damned, no matter what he does. I’m sorry. I know that some of my readers are thinking, “Well, golly. He’s not the most compassionate type.” It’s true. Compassion is not my greatest virtue. If it’s compassion you want, you need to find yourself some white Evangelical Christians and Orthodox Jews. Those are the folks who are always going out of their way to give their time, their money, their sweat, and sometimes their lives, saving strangers who are not even of the same faith or race. You know, the guys for whom the socialist mainstream media have only contempt. I was raised a secular humanist, and secular humanism has no room for compassion. Excepting for libertarians, who don’t even claim to have compassion, secular humanists claim to feel compassion for blacks and Hispanics, and illegal immigrants, oops, undocumented immigrants, and homosexuals, but what they really have is political loyalty to those groups and a corresponding political enmity towards (non-socialist) heterosexual white Americans. If they really had compassion, they’d feel it for white Evangelicals and Orthodox Jews, as well as for all those groups whom they politically protect … and live off of. The only CNN reporter who showed any decency or courage was Anderson Cooper, who pointed out – also by way of rhetorical questions -- to Jesse Jackson that New Orleans is a black-run city, that Mayor Nagin is black, and that it was Mayor Nagin’s responsibility to take care of his constituents. CNN security consultant Richard Falkenrath said as much, in a roundabout way, when he contradicted Jon Healy. “There was a cascading failure of public infrastructure that we hadn’t planned for.” English translation: ‘The first line of defense always is constituted by local authorities. You know, the sewer and water and transportation and police and fire and health departments. Well, not only did one of them screw up, but they all screwed up, one on top of the other. Imagine the 102 stories of the World Trade Center towers collapsing one on top of the other on 911, and you have an idea of the failures by local authorities.’ No federal agency can ever swoop in fast enough to compensate for such incompetence at the local level. The locals must always hold the fort for several days, until the feds can get their airlifts and personnel organized and at the scene of the catastrophe. That Jon Healy would damn the feds while absolving local officials of responsibility shows either incredible ignorance or breath-taking dishonesty. The contrast to Mississippi could not have been more stark. Mississippi had less warning about Katrina. And yet, once people heard that Katrina was coming, they got in their cars and drove away. CNN’s Anderson Cooper reported from Waveland, MS, where a married white couple and the husband’s mother had returned to see the leveled house they’d lost. In New Orleans, 150,000 people refused to leave, despite railroad lines and bus depots. Mayor Nagin likes the title of mayor and the power the job confers, but like most black urban mayors, he refuses to lead. Or rather, he thinks that leadership begins with demanding nourishment from white people, and ends with biting the hands that feed him. As the blog Our Way of Life showed (a tip o’ the hat to Steve Sailer), Mayor Nagin had hundreds of buses sitting around in parking lots prior to Katrina, which by Sailer’s reckoning could have been used to transport up to 12,000 people per trip to higher ground in Baton Rouge, 75 miles away. Instead, Nagin dithered, and then raged. Meanwhile, the parking lots were flooded in, wasting the buses. As blogger Zach wrote, “Why did the mayor not use the buses?! This is incompetence and stupidity of the first order, period.” Think Locally, Act Federally One of the many lessons lost in this disaster is that local disaster relief is not a federal obligation; it is a state and local matter. On Fox News a few days ago, members of the “Fox All-Stars” panel noted that financially bailing out the Gulf region hit by Katrina is not a federal mandate. One panelist cited people whose homes were devastated who said proudly that they would rebuild. (Although no one said so, they were talking primarily of whites, because blacks were more likely to be clustered in cities and to proudly demand to be saved by the feds.) But the rest us would have to pay for the rebuilding! The proud locals had knowingly moved to the hurricane belt, where there is no hurricane or flood insurance, expecting the federal government to pick up the tab when the foreseeable occurred. And “conservative” George Bush will not disappoint them, because just like his socialist adversaries, he seeks to buy votes with federal taxpayer dollars wherever and whenever he can. If the feds kept out of such local disasters, and left them to the governments of New Orleans and Louisiana, respectively, New Orleans blacks would still blame the white devils for their problems, but at least those white devils wouldn’t go broke paying for them. Mayor Ray Nagin and Gov. Kathleen Blanco would be forced to do their jobs. The price of area housing and land have artificially risen over the years, due to the flood of federal dollars after previous natural disasters. Without the artificial inflation of federal dollars, prices would return to a reasonable level – not that property buyers would acknowledge the trade-off. That would ease financial pressure on future home buyers, not to mention federal taxpayers in the other 49 states. Gulf Coast whites and blacks alike will expect federal help; of that there can be no doubt. But the contrast between whites who sought to save themselves and blacks who expected to be saved; between whites who “helped each other” and blacks who tried to murder rescue workers and police officers, could not have been more stark. Expect to see hundreds of millions of dollars of federal and private aid money stolen in New Orleans, as happened with the South Asian tidal wave aid money earlier this year. Such criminality by public officials is a matter of pride in Third World jurisdictions. Expect more cases of insurance fraud in the white rural and suburban areas hit in Mississippi and Alabama, but unlike in New Orleans, private white frauds are much more likely to be prosecuted than criminal black public officials. During the 1960s, over 100 such “hurricanes” hit America’s cities, large and small. At the time, various politicians and alleged social scientists and journalists told Americans that the “hurricanes” were justifiable reactions to white “racism.” They lied. The riots were not reactions to white racism, but explosions of black racism. Blacks had just enjoyed (1940-1960) the greatest explosion of prosperity in black American history, unparalleled to this day. They had been granted, the Constitution be damned, Brown vs. Board of Education, by the Supreme Court. They had been granted the 1964 U.S. Civil Rights Act. And so how did they respond? By rioting, natch. Isn’t that how everyone celebrates improvements in their lives and historic political victories? The riots were statements of confidence, based on the victories, telling whites to get out of town. Those whites who resisted, were labeled racists, as were those whites who left. But once whites left, conditions in black-dominated cities got worse, not better. Let’s Form a Commission! In 1967, Pres. Lyndon Johnson formed an eleven-member National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders to study the race riots, which came to be known as the Kerner Commission, after its titular head, Otto Kerner. The 1968 report’s summary argued, “Our nation is moving toward two societies, one black, one white—separate and unequal.”Although the positions of that summary are a part of socialist gospel in America, as Abigail and Stephan Thernstrom observed in their classic work, America in Black and White, “very little of value was accomplished by the original body. Its authors appear to have been so traumatized by the ghetto riots during the long, hot summers of 1965-1968 that they had deluded themselves into thinking that the condition of African Americans in the United States had been deteriorating rather than improving since World War II, and that this supposed deterioration was in good part due to the spatial differentiation between cities and suburbs.” Actually, the Thernstroms were too easy on the commission, which was dominated by one of the most venal, stupid, incompetent white politicians ever to ascend to the national stage in these United States, New York City Mayor John Vliet Lindsay (1921-1999). As Vincent J. Cannato chronicled in The Ungovernable City: John Lindsay and His Struggle to Save New York, Lindsay took over -- really, hijacked -- the commission and manipulated it into accepting a summary written by two of his aides, Peter Goldmark and Jay Kriegel. “[The summary] spoke in loud and clear terms placing the blame squarely on white America for the recent urban riots.”John Lindsay’s qualifications to lead were that he was 6’4” tall, had matinee idol looks, seemingly limitless energy, people thought he was rich, and he oozed confidence, even if there was no basis for that confidence. Lindsay had “compassion” for New York’s blacks, which he put into practice by more than doubling the welfare rolls (from 565,000 to 1,165,000, according to historian Fred Siegel) by inviting unwed black mothers to quit their jobs and illegally go on the dole; putting black supremacist gangsters on the city payroll; ordering the police to stand down, in the face of black supremacist gangsters’ organized assaults on white teachers in the city’s schools; and treating the white working and middle classes who were paying for his experiment in social disintegration with contempt. Lindsay had hoped to use the Kerner Commission as a stepping stone to the presidency; Americans thought otherwise. And yet, America’s socialist and communist elites have uncritically cited the nonsense promoted by Lindsay’s aides tens of thousands of times since 1968. It’s easy to blame whites for black racism, when one travels in taxicabs (or chauffeured limousines) rather than public transportation, and enjoys 24-hour security in luxury buildings, thus protected from the predations of the people whom one champions. A New Reason for Hating? But some will argue that what I am saying is irrelevant. After all, the black “anger” on display in New Orleans is a response to the federal delays. Nonsense. First of all, black “anger” is a euphemism for hatred. The mainstream press has resolved never to speak of blacks as haters. And yet, is there a group in America that hates more? Who hates homosexuals more? Who is more xenophobic? More misogynistic? No, no, no and no. Instead, the media portray white, heterosexual Christians – probably the most tolerant group in the world, as haters of the above-cited groups. Secondly, the racism excuse is already in use. Third, if when 1960s blacks began throwing race riots the way whites threw block parties they were responses to “racism,” how does one rationalize the race riots after NBA championships by the Chicago Bulls and Los Angeles Lakers as responses to “racism”? The “racism” line was always as phony as a three-dollar bill. Race riots are rarely a response to racism; more typically, whether in 1863 New York, 1921 Tulsa, or 1992 Los Angeles, they are expressions of racism. The fact of the matter is that an ever-growing proportion of urban blacks – females and males alike – is in a perpetual state of rage. Rage, when whites are around, and rage, when whites are absent. For forty years, urban blacks have used hatred of whites as an excuse for not leading responsible lives. Psychologically and morally speaking, I see no difference between the genocidal hatred of Arabs toward Jews, and the majority of urban American blacks toward … everyone. What we have seen in New Orleans is not merely a reaction to Katrina; it is simply a dramatic version of life in many black-dominated American cities – Detroit, Washington, DC, Baltimore, St. Louis, Gary IN, East St. Louis IL, Oakland CA, etc. And at the rate at which illegal immigrants are importing similar pathologies and lawlessness from Mexico and elsewhere, in twenty years all of America’s cities with populations of over 100,000 will be just like New Orleans. New Orleans is not an aberration; we have been seeing its like for over 40 years. Expect to see more of the same.


Site Meter