Joe Buck, Edgar Renteria, and the Golden Baseball League: Of “Princes,” Paupers, and Thieves

(Corrected, updated, revised and expanded!)
By Nicholas Stix

On Thursday night, following the San Francisco Giants’ 9-0 drubbing of the Texas Rangers in game two of the World Series, Fox Sports announcer Joe Buck interviewed one of the game’s heroes, Colombian shortstop, Edgar Renteria. Buck mentioned that Renteria had considered retiring from the game. Fans who didn’t know Renteria’s official age would not have been surprised; the veteran looks to be 40, or close to it. After all, unless he was really busted up, why would a much younger, still talented player consider hanging up his cleats, when he could still make millions of dollars per season? Indeed, after the 2008 season, Renteria signed a two-year free agent contract with San Francisco for $18.5 million.

As soon as the interview was over, Buck informed the viewing public, “Edgar Renteria is a prince of a person.”

(Joe Buck is the son of late, legendary Cardinals’ announcer, Jack Buck; see also here.)
Afterwards, I checked Renteria’s stats. Though he is finishing his 15th full season as a starting, big league shortstop, the ancient, paunchy veteran allegedly only turned 35 on August 7. Thus, when he was “considering retirement,” he was allegedly just past his 33nd birthday. But over the past four years, starting when he was allegedly only 31, he has been injury-plagued, and went from averaging 152 games per season from 2003 through 2006, to only 114.5 from 2007 through 2010, and missed 90 games this season. Such physical deterioration is characteristic of players in their late thirties or older.

Meanwhile, Renteria’s obese, old-looking, Dominican, Giants teammate, Juan Uribe, is allegedly 31. And Renteria’s middle-aged looking, paunchy, Dominican, former Marlins teammate, Luis Castillo, only turned “35” last month. During the 2009 season, when I asked The Boss how old Castillo looked, she said “40,” which sounded about right to me. At the time, he was allegedly only 33.

And last spring, I celebrated my annual 21st birthday. I did, I tell you! My ten-year-old son even bought me a “Happy 21st Birthday” card. If Uribe can claim to be 31, and Renteria and Castillo 35, respectively, then I can say I’m 21, darn it! Heck, in that alternate universe, VDARE.com’s Joe Guzzardi, who looks fit as a fiddle these days, may only be 20!

Latin players lying about their ages, and even their identities, is an old story of cultural enrichment. But that’s not what has me questioning Renteria’s royal character, or Buck’s judgment.

Whatever Renteria’s real age may be, I know that he is not “a prince of a person.” For one thing, he has conducted a feud with Colombia’s second-best ballplayer, Orlando Cabrera, in a less than princely fashion.

More importantly, as Joe Guzzardi reported on May 29, 2009, Renteria, who with his brother, Edinson, owns the Colombian Professional Baseball League, entered into a two-year affiliation agreement with the independent Golden Baseball League to run the on-field operations of the GBL’s Yuma Scorpions, whereupon the Renterias fired every single American player, and replaced him with a Colombian.

(Reports on ownership of the Scorpions were murky; some reports said that the GBL owned them, while others identified Diamond Sports & Entertainment as the owner. But since David Kaval was cited as the CEO of each organization, it’s his show. However, as one might expect of the flying-by-the-seat-of your-pants world of independent baseball, Kaval is constantly on the prowl for new investors, affiliates, and “creative” ways to reduce overhead, such as the 2% tax, referred to variously as a “Hospitality Tax” and as a “Two Percent Special Revenue Excise Tax” on all bars, restaurants, hotels and motels that the City of Yuma levied in May, 2009. Kaval inked the affiliation deal with the Renterias “less than 12 hours after the hospitality tax passed.” Yuma’s citizens had no idea what they were really voting for. Thus did Americans unwittingly subsidize the massive firing of American ballplayers and their replacement by inferior foreigners.

Baseball owners are unsentimental businessmen whose fortunes are based to a large extent on their ability to pluck the heartstrings of sentimental fans. The lower one goes on the sports business food chain, the more the Field of Dreams mystique comes into play. But David Kaval had no compunctions about a team of American ballplayers getting cut loose.)

Renteria could not possibly argue that the American players stunk, and that the Colombian players were an upgrade. As Guzzardi observed, Colombia—in contrast, say, to the Dominican Republic—has never been home to an abundance of great baseball players. The only successful Colombian players are Renteria and his nemesis, Orlando Cabrera. And 10 of the American Scorpions whom Renteria shafted, quickly managed to sign on with other teams.

Then, on opening night, the displaced American Scorpions, many now playing for the Saint George Roadrunners, hammered the Colombians 13-3. A day later the Roadrunners inflicted more of the same, beating the Scorpions 11-6. Through the season’s first week, the Colombian Scorpions occupy last place with a 1-5 record.

Making the case that the current Colombian Scorpions are better players than the past American Scorpions, as [Dave Kaval] tried to do, is hard when the South American pitchers can’t get anyone out.

Bad News Baseball: Yuma Scorpions’ American-Born Players Displaced by Imported Colombians by Joe Guzzardi, VDARE.com, May 29, 2009.

In fact, far from improving the team, the Colombians made the Scorpions the worst team in the entire Golden League. Although they had finished a respectable 47-39, with a .547 winning percentage in 2008, the Colombian Scorpions finished 29-47, with a .382 winning percentage, in 2009. Meanwhile, the Scorpions’ South Division rival Saint George Roadrunners, fielding several of the discriminated-against, American former Scorpions, finished 48-34, with a .585 winning percentage, to win the South Division.

That season, one of the American Scorpions whom Renteria had discriminated against, A.J. Valentine, was named one of the two Golden League Players of the Month for June:

GBL June Players of the Month are 1B AJ Valentine and LHP Isaac Hess
St. George 1B Leads League in HR & RBIs, Victoria Starter Posts 5-0 Record

“San Ramon, CA. July 8, 2009 – The Golden Baseball League announced today that the Players of the Month for June are St. George Roadrunner 1B AJ Valentine and Victoria Seal LHP Isaac Hess. Both players have also been named GBL All-Stars and will be performing at the GBL All-Star game in St. George, Utah next Tuesday on July 14th.

“Valentine, 26, 6-6, 220 went undrafted [as did Hess, after leading “South Mountain Community College … to the junior college world series”!] out of Cal State Stanislaus after putting up extraordinary power numbers. He has been a prolific slugger in the GBL for two years as he was signed by the Yuma Scorpions part way through the 2007 and hit 22 home runs and drove in 106 runs in 129 games in Yuma over the last two seasons. Joining St. George this year, his power numbers continue to climb and his batting average has soared as well. During the first month of this season he led the league in home runs with 8, RBIs with 46, and Slugging Average at .678. He was also second in doubles with 13 and second in runs scored with 42 as he went 45 for 121 and posted a batting average of .372. In addition, he is considered one of the top defensive first basemen in the league and was key to his Roadrunner's winning the first half South Division title….”

Renteria obviously had no choice but to dump Valentine!

Though the American former Scorpions enjoyed a measure of revenge, and the Colombian Scorpions’ hapless season was poetic justice, according to the 1964 U.S. Civil Rights Act, Renteria was guilty of a classic case of national origins discrimination.

Unfortunately, by then, the White House and Department of Justice were both under occupation by racists and traitors who were and remain determined to rob white, heterosexual Christians of all of their rights, while granting to blacks, Hispanics, foreigners, homosexuals, etc. all sorts of illegal privileges.

More poetic justice: For the 2010 season, Kaval ended the affiliation agreement with the Renterias, and entered into a new affiliation agreement with a married couple named Ricky and Romy (Acevedo) Smith, who represented themselves in America as “Golden Gloves Professional Baseball” (GGPB), and operated the Scorpions on behalf of Edwin Zerpa, the president of the Venezuelan Baseball Federation, who alleges that Ricky Smith represented himself to Zerpa as the head of the Golden Baseball League—that would be Dave Kaval.

The Smiths’ visionary business plan involved replacing the Colombians with over 40 Venezuelans, and not paying any of them (or anyone else)! By late July, after months of the Smiths not paying anyone, while claiming to have problems transferring money from Venezuela to Arizona, Kaval took over operating the club.

(The Venezuelans played well in the first half, tying for first place in the South Division at 27-18, but losing on a tie-breaker, before folding in the second half, to finish 41-49.)

Kaval has promised legal action against Ricky Smith who, according to Edwin Zerpa, was well-known in the highest circles in Venezuela, but who, it turned out, had a long record of bilking people in Canada. And according to Edwin Zerpa, Romy Acevedo Smith was wanted by Interpol, but Dave Kaval insists that Zerpa has no credibility.

My hunch is that since the former Romy Acevedo reportedly acted on some level as go-between with the Venezuelans, that she is from that country. What Ricky Smith’s background is (Canadian?), remains to be seen.

By the way, I didn’t have to go cherry-picking for “Latin baseball corruption” stories; the phrase is redundant. The striking thing is how rarely America’s Hispandering MSM report on such fascinating, vibrant, diverse doings.

Thus, when Joe Buck called Edgar Renteria “a prince of a person,” perhaps he was thinking in multicultural terms: ‘For a Latin, Third World baseball guy, he’s a prince of a person.’

* * *

I’m an American; I don’t think in multicultural terms. Thus, there are many words that I can think of to describe what kind of person Edgar Renteria really is, but Peter won’t let me use them, and so, “criminal” and “dirtbag” will have to do. Foreign Hispanics like Renteria (and Edwin Zerpa and Romy Acevedo Smith) are culturally enriching our national pastime, just as they are culturally enriching our nation, by introducing levels of corruption and chauvinism that are the norm where they come from, but which over generations had been reduced to aberrations here… until the Hispanic invasion took place.

America is today a place where opportunities and privileges are largely divvied up between the children of the rich, members of unconstitutionally protected Third World/affirmative action groups, and the criminal class that exploits the latter. The American dream of making it on one’s own hard work and talent is on life-support.

I wonder what that old patriot, Jack Buck (1924-2002) who, while in the 9th Infantry Division, got shot up holding the (Ludendorff) Bridge at Remagen would say about that, if he were still alive.  

Gawker vs. Christine O’Donnell: We Take the Politics of Personal Destruction Seriously

 
Dustin Dominiak
 
By Nicholas Stix
Revised and expanded at 2:35 a.m., on Monday, November 1, 2010.

(Update at 4:21 a.m., on November 2: The sleuths at The Smoking Gun have exposed “Anonymous” as Dustin Dominiak.)

Do you “pick your nose with a rubber hose”? If you’re a Democrat, that’s an endearing trait. But if you’re to the right of Pol Pot, it disqualifies you from public office! Says who? Says the leftwing Gestapo that publicizes the most intimate details of the lives of both their opponents and other people who were just minding their own business. And as Christine O’Donnell and others have learned, if the Gestapo can’t find anything embarrassing about you, they’ll just make something up.

Gawker is a popular, Democratic Web site “edited” by Remy Stern and published by Nick Denton that specializes in the race and sex-baiting of anyone whom its bosses consider insufficiently racist, sexist, heterophobic or anti-American, while simultaneously censoring its discussion threads, so as to fabricate a fake consensus. (Stern permits the occasional criticism, in order to make the threads look legitimate.) However, it has rigorous content requirements: The attack must be a pure ad hominem, and thus have no intellectual or moral substance. Given those ground rules, a personal attack on Christine O’Donnell was bound to come. And now, it has.

“I Had a One-Night Stand With Christine O’Donnell,” by Anonymous, is evidently Gawker’s contribution to the Democratic Party’s October Surprise tradition.

The most important thing about this kiss-and-tell, as far as I could tell, was that its title is misleading. Without knowing anything about the author or his credibility, simply taking his words at face value, I concluded that he had not had a one-night stand with Christine O’Donnell, i.e., they hadn’t had sex. Neither coitus, nor anything else. After drinking together one Halloween night three years ago and making out, they’d slept together for about two hours in the author’s bed (as in knocked out, snoring, farting, whatever) after which he got her up, and drove her to her car (parked at a friend’s house—the particulars aren’t worth the space), and headed off to work.

The author seeks to insinuate that he had sex with O’Donnell, via the title and some vague language:

I won't get into the nitty gritty details of what happened between the sheets that evening.

Of course, not. Because nothing happened.

Gawker has so little sense of decency that it would have had no compunctions about printing graphic, hard-core pornography about every sexual detail, had there been any details to recount. As it is, “Anonymous” tries to give himself credibility by insulting an aspect of O’Donnell’s cosmetic practices that, if true, was not at all wanting. The insult merely reflected negatively on the writer’s manhood in two ways: That he would have a problem with a perfectly normal practice, and that he would mention it at all. Unintentionally or no, his very insult proves that the author did not have sex with O’Donnell.

Obviously, that was a big turnoff, and I quickly lost interest.

I believe that the weasely language was designed to avoid a libel lawsuit. ‘Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, at no point in his kiss-and-tell did my client ever state that he had had sex with the plaintiff.’

So, why bother? Leftists today tend to rationalize any act, no matter how despicable against their opponents, by maintaining that their target is somehow a “hypocrite.” Once upon a time, lefties might have made some pathetic, half-baked attempt to show how the target of their hatred was somehow a phony, but typically today, they simply shriek “hypocrite!” (or “racist!,” “sexist!,” “homophobe!,” or “xenophobe!”), without explanation.

But Gawker is classier than that, and so in “Why We Published the Christine O’Donnell Story,” it returned to the gold standard of asserting that O’Donnell failed to meet a saintly self-imposed standard for sexual behavior. But just to be extra, extra careful, yet another anonymous Gawker author redefined the “one-night stand” into “a naked sleepover.” What a coward. Had the original title been, “I Had a One-Night Naked Sleepover With Christine O’Donnell,” people would have variously yawned and chuckled. After all, the typical Gawker fan probably doesn’t read more than the title, while the big scholars in its audience might read the first few paragraphs.

Much of the criticism leveled against us is based on the premise that we think hopping into bed, naked and drunk, with men or women whenever one wants is "slutty," and that therefore our publication of Anonymous' story was intended to diminish O'Donnell on those terms. [Nonsense.] Any reader of this site ought to rather quickly gather that we are in fact avid supporters of hopping into bed, naked and drunk, with men or women that one has just met. [But according to Gawker anti-ethics, one is supposed to have sex with them!]

Our problem with O'Donnell—and the reason that the information we published about her is relevant—is that she has repeatedly described herself and her beliefs in terms that suggest that there is something wrong with hopping into bed, naked and drunk, with a man or woman whom one has just met. So that fact that she behaves that way, while publicly condemning similar behavior, in the context of an attempt to win a seat in the United States Senate, is a story we thought people might like to know about. We also thought it would get us lots of clicks and money and attention. But we thought it would get us clicks and money and attention because it was exposing her lies.

Now a lot of people think that the fact that O'Donnell declined to actually engage in sexual intercourse with Anonymous renders the entire story irrelevant and invasive: She calls herself a virgin, and acts like a virgin, so what's the big deal?

More mental masturbation follows, where Anonymous II seeks to show that Gawker is right, no matter what it does. But Gawker insinuated that O’Donnell did have sex with Anonymous I, and is now furiously backtracking, but without admitting that it is. The reason for that is that the purpose of the initial “story” was to libel and humiliate O’Donnell in the most invasive, intimate, disgusting way possible, while maintaining a legal fig leaf of plausible deniability, to shield Denton from lawsuits.

Compared to today, the 2000 election was the Golden Age of October Surprises: There were two that year. The first was an academic hoax committed by a professor named Stephen Klein and comrades Laura S. Hamilton, Daniel F. McCaffrey and Brian M. Stecher, with the support of Rand President James Thomson. Klein got the Rand Corporation to pay him and the others to write what was no more than a long opinion paper regurgitating every anti-standardized-testing whopper in the book, and trying to pass it off as a scholarly debunking of the “Texas Miracle” in public education under Gov. George W. Bush. But instead of Klein debunking Bush, I debunked Klein, showing that he had no evidence, with which to support his assumptions.

It wasn’t until 2003 that whistleblower Robert Kimball, a former assistant principal at Houston's Sharpstown High School, exposed the “Texas Miracle” as a fraud, but not based on any of the talking points Klein & Co. had retailed. Bush’s education officials had, by hook or by crook, kept weak students out of the testing sample. But Klein and his comrades had been too lazy to do any of the gumshoe work necessary to ferret out what was really afoot.

The second 2000 October Surprise came about two weeks later, with the true revelation that in 1976, George W. Bush had been arrested for DWI in Maine. He hadn’t harmed anyone, but he was a Republican, and so that was supposed to be worse than gay Democratic Cong. Barney Frank’s boy toy getting caught turning Frank’s apartment into a homosexual whorehouse, gay Democratic Cong. Gerry Studds having sex with a 17-year-old congressional page, or Ted Kennedy killing May Jo Kopechne.

But now, Gawker publishes the anonymous kiss-and-not-really-tell story of some young loser. It used to be that lefties would scream that conservative Republicans were all closet homosexuals. What now? That they’re closet heterosexuals?!

I hope that Gawker doesn’t catch me engaging in serial murder, or committing a rape-torture-murder. If it stayed true to its “logic,” such as it is, its anonymous writers would then complain,

Much of the criticism leveled against us is based on the premise that we think committing serial murder and rape-torture-murder is "immoral," and that therefore our publication of Anonymous' story was intended to diminish Stix on those terms. Any reader of this site ought to rather quickly gather that we are in fact avid supporters of committing serial murder and rape-torture-murder.

Our problem with Stix—and the reason that the information we published about him is relevant—is that he has repeatedly described himself and his beliefs in terms that suggest that there is something wrong with committing serial murder and rape-torture-murder. So that fact that he behaves that way, while publicly condemning similar behavior, is a story we thought people might like to know about. We also thought it would get us lots of clicks and money and attention. But we thought it would get us clicks and money and attention because it was exposing his lies.

I learned the term "dirty tricks" from Democrats, who were chasing after Republicans, but over 95% of the dirty tricks I've come across were committed by Democrats.

It is the Left, as exemplified by Nick Denton, not the Right, that obsessively peeps into people’s sex lives. It is the Left, not the Right, which obsessively engages in racism, sexism, and even gay-baiting (it was lefty Frank Rich who forced David Brock out of the closet). (But when Republicans tolerate homosexual staffers, the Left considers them hypocritical, not decent.) It is the Left that calls blacks the “n-word” (see also here).

It is the Left that assaults women, e.g., Ann Coulter (here and here). The Left constantly creates hoaxes, in order to cover for and project its own obsessive hatreds onto its enemies. The Left’s constant talk of hate is both a projection of, and a diversion from its own insatiable hate. Take away the Left’s hate, and little remains.

The sole reason that Denton and Stern ran the defamatory dreck against O’Donnell is because she’s a Republican. The question remains: Will Gawker’s imbecilic, despicable attack harm or help her? Tune in Tuesday night, for the answer.

Joe Buck: “Edgar Renteria is a Prince of a Person”; the Former Yuma Scorpions Whom Renteria Illegally Discriminated Against Might Beg to Differ

By Nicholas Stix

Last night, following the San Francisco Giants’ 9-0 drubbing of the Texas Rangers in game two of the World Series, Fox Sports announcer Joe Buck (the son of late, legendary Cardinals’ announcer, Jack; also here), interviewed one of the game’s heroes, Colombian shortstop, Edgar Renteria. Buck mentioned that Renteria had considered retiring, rather than coming back for another season.

Fans who didn’t know Renteria’s official age would not have been surprised; he looks to be 40, or close to it. Indeed, I had assumed that he was around that age. After all, unless he was really busted up, why would a much younger, still talented player consider hanging up his cleats, when he can still make millions of dollars per season? Indeed, after the 2008 season, Renteria signed a two-year free agent contract with San Francisco for $18.5 million.

Afterwards, I checked Renteria’s stats. Though he is finishing his 15th full season as a big league shortstop, the ancient, paunchy veteran allegedly only turned 34 on August 7. Thus, when he was “considering retirement,” he was allegedly just past his 32nd birthday. Meanwhile, Renteria’s fat, old-looking, Dominican Giants teammate, Juan Uribe, is allegedly 31. And Renteria’s middle-aged looking, Dominican, former Marlins teammate, Luis Castillo, only turned “35” last month. During the 2009 season, when I asked The Boss how old Castillo looked, she said “40,” which sounded about right to me. At the time, he was allegedly 33.

And last spring, I celebrated my annual 21st birthday. I did, I tell you! On his tenth birthday, my son even bought me a “Happy 21st birthday” card. If Uribe can be 31, Renteria 34, and Castillo 35, then I can be 21, darn it!

Latin players lying about their ages, and even their identities, is an old story. But that’s not what has me questioning Renteria’s royal character, or Buck’s judgment.

Whatever Renteria’s real age may be, I know that he is not “a prince of a Person.” For as VDARE’s Joe Guzzardi reported on May 29 of last year, Renteria and his business partner and fellow Colombian (then playing for the Oakland Athletics), Orlando Cabrera, who together own the Colombian Professional Baseball League, exploited a business agreement they had with the minor league Yuma Scorpions of the Golden League, to fire every single American player on the Scorpions, and replace him with a Colombian.

Renteria and Cabrera could not possibly argue that the American players stunk, and that the Colombian players were an upgrade. As Guzzardi observed, Colombia—in contrast, say, to the Dominican Republic—has never been home to an abundance of great baseball players. And 10 of the American Scorpions whom Renteria and Cabrera had shafted, quickly managed to sign on with other teams.

Then, on opening night, the displaced American Scorpions, many now playing for the Saint George Roadrunners, hammered the Colombians 13-3. A day later the Roadrunners inflicted more of the same, beating the Scorpions 11-6. Through the season’s first week, the Colombian Scorpions occupy last place with a 1-5 record.

Making the case that the current Colombian Scorpions are better players than the past American Scorpions, as [a team official] tried to do, is hard when the South American pitchers can’t get anyone out.

In fact, far from improving the team, the Colombian Scorpions were the worst team in the entire Golden League, finishing 29-47, with a .382 winning percentage. Meanwhile, the Scorpions’ South Division rival Saint George Roadrunners, fielding several of the discriminated-against, American former Scorpions, finished 48-34, with a .585 winning percentage, to win the South Division.

That season, one of the American Scorpions whom Renteria and Cabrera had discriminated against, A.J. Valentine, was named one of the two Golden League Players of the Month for June:

GBL June Players of the Month are 1B AJ Valentine and LHP Isaac Hess
St. George 1B Leads League in HR & RBIs, Victoria Starter Posts 5-0 Record

San Ramon, CA. July 8, 2009 – The Golden Baseball League announced today that the Players of the Month for June are St. George Roadrunner 1B AJ Valentine and Victoria Seal LHP Isaac Hess. Both players have also been named GBL All-Stars and will be performing at the GBL All-Star game in St. George, Utah next Tuesday on July 14th.

Valentine, 26, 6-6, 220 went undrafted out of Cal State Stanislaus after putting up extraordinary power numbers. He has been a prolific slugger in the GBL for two years as he was signed by the Yuma Scorpions part way through the 2007 and hit 22 home runs and drove in 106 runs in 129 games in Yuma over the last two seasons. Joining St. George this year, his power numbers continue to climb and his batting average has soared as well. During the first month of this season he led the league in home runs with 8, RBIs with 46, and Slugging Average at .678. He was also second in doubles with 13 and second in runs scored with 42 as he went 45 for 121 and posted a batting average of .372. In addition, he is considered one of the top defensive first basemen in the league and was key to his Roadrunner's winning the first half South Division title….

Though the American former Scorpions enjoyed a measure of revenge, and the Colombian Scorpions’ hapless season was poetic justice, according to the U.S. Civil Rights Act, Renteria and Cabrera were guilty of a classic case of national origins discrimination.

Unfortunately, by then, the White House and Department of Justice were both under occupation by racists and traitors who were and remain determined to rob white, heterosexual Christians of all of their rights, while granting to blacks, Hispanics, foreigners, homosexuals, etc. all sorts of illegal privileges.

There are many words that I can think of to describe what kind of person Edgar Renteria is, but Peter won’t let me use them, and so, criminal and dirtbag will have to do.

America is today a place where opportunities and privileges are largely divvied up between the children of the rich, and members of unconstitutionally protected Third World/affirmative action groups. The American dream of making it on one’s own hard work and talent is on life-support.

I wonder what Jack Buck would say about that, if he were still alive.

“God Bless America,” or Goddamn America?

By Nicholas Stix

I just turned the sound back on, on World Series game 2. I’d had to hit the mute button during the seventh inning stretch, because my ears were about to bleed.

A youngish female, wearing the dress uniform of the U.S. Army, was allegedly singing. The public address announcer told people to doff their caps, which is inappropriate, because “God Bless America” is not the “National Anthem”; it has no official status. The announcer identified the female as a “veteran,” who is now involved in Army intelligence and psy ops, if I recall correctly, but somehow I doubt she’d seen combat. She looked white, but commenced to ape the worst attributes of contemporary black singers, ridiculously stretching out notes, to the point where the song lost all shape.

Not that it’s much of a song, to begin with. Still, I always stop talking when it is sung, or else sing along, but I don’t treat it like the “National Anthem,” because it isn’t.

I emphasize the woman’s aping of bad black singing habits, because while whites still, more often than not, respect “The National Anthem,” blacks, with rare exception, style all over it. I see this as a form of disrespect, in which blacks deliberately do things in as different a fashion as whites, in order to express their racist contempt for them. (Actually, if memory serves, it was a Puerto Rican racist and anti-American, Jose Feliciano, who first styled his way through “The National Anthem.”) Just like making a point of having children out of wedlock, refusing to obey the law, shouting in places where they’re not supposed to—like a theater during a movie.

I understand what blacks are doing when they show such contempt, and blacks know what they are doing, but I’m not sure that all whites who imitate blacks understand what they’re doing. While some whites may understand that they are being defiantly racist, I suspect that most of them think that whatever obnoxiously racist blacks do is “cool,” and therefore that they too are being cool. Well, if you really want to be cool, walk around saying “nigger” this and “nigger” that, the way all “cool” blacks do all day long.

Whites don’t want to be that cool, because it would violate the Black Rules, and result in racist blacks coming down on them, instead of on other, uncool whites.

And by the way, it’s the World Series. Period. Not “the Fall Classic.” Calling it “the Fall Classic” is hyperbolic, and detracts rather than adds to the original term. I like Tommy Lasorda, and admire the great career he had in baseball as much as the next man, but that does not oblige me to echo the stupid cliché he coined.

Newt Gingrich Tells Reconquista Network Univision That We Must Have a Mass Amnesty of All Illegal Human Beings

 

A write-up of the interview is here.

Whites Have Nothing to Apologize for!

 

A reader writes:

Hello my name is ……. and am in accord with the bulk of your writings.

I currently live in Baltimore a majority black urban wasteland. I have been attacked by blacks on several occasions, primarily in my youth walking home from bars after not getting a cab. Considering the numerical superiority of my assailants I felt no qualms about remonstrating quite vigorously. Never any mention in the paper or even in the crime blotter.

I was in the military for a time and have observed blacks behaving badly all across the country. Most notably New Orleans having made the mistake of attending Mardi Gras in 1995. All members of our party were separately engaged by multiple blacks presumably in the pursuit of robbery, but of course I know better now.

Blacks hate whites very deeply, they of course want sex with our women but they hate them too. I honestly believe one cannot live in a city like Baltimore or really any majority black city and not become involved in a violent incident with a black. I am of course disagreeable but I have known many kind and gentle people and they have had trouble also. I will not go into further detail at the moment because it would not be prudent, I could go on ad nauseum about bad experiences with minorities, perhaps another time. But I despise them and I despise their guilty, weak, white allies. One would think they would get tired of apologizing for them. Sorry for soliloquizing –…….

My response follows:

Dear ……,

Thanks for writing. And don't apologize! You have nothing to apologize for. My God, it's bad enough that whites take their lives in their hands not only every time they walk on a street in Baltimore, but every time they walk around "safe" white neighborhoods, and, as some poor young fellows learned in Baytown, Texas a few years back, just walking on their own parents' property, to throw out some garbage. But on top of that, they're not allowed to so much as complain about the race war being waged on them, since that will cost them their jobs, their professions and, as Jeremiah Munsen and the Mizzou Two learned, even their freedom.

Regards,

Nicholas

P.S. I only mentioned Baltimore specifically, because my correspondent did. What he said is of course true of "any majority black city," any city with a substantial number of blacks and, increasingly, even cities with relatively few blacks, such as Seattle, which was reportedly only 8.2% black, as of 2005.

Almost 10 Days After the Henning, TN Post Office Double Murder: Faceless, Raceless Killers Still at Large

By David in TN

Previously:

“$25,000 Reward, No Description of Suspects”; and

“Reward for Information on Raceless Suspects in Henning, Tennessee Post Office Double Murder Increases to $50,000.”

After nearly 10 days, there hasn’t been any news regarding the Henning, TN double murder. The reward hasn’t led anybody to talk and apparently no leads have panned out.

A sign of the times is no description of the suspects.

NS: I suppose the next step is a news whiteout of such murders even locally.

Barack Obama, Bob Herbert, and Race Politics

By Nicholas Stix

June 21, 2004
A Different Drummer

A recent news story about a mouse born to two “mommies” suggested that the feminist fantasy of parthenogenesis, in which women would bear children without any “input” from men, might someday be realized. But New York Times columnist Bob Herbert went the pc feminists at the ABC one better: On June 4, he suggested that Illinois politician Barack Obama was birthed by Obama’s father, without a female (what used to be called a “mother”) playing any role in the matter.

O.K., Herbert didn’t actually say that, though he’s said things just as outrageous in the past. What he did was refer to a man as black, whose late mother was white. “At the moment he has a substantial lead in the polls. If that lead holds and he wins in November, he’ll be only the third African-American to take a seat in the Senate since Reconstruction.”

The term “African-American” is silly enough, seeing as it is a euphemism for black, which used to be a euphemism for brown, yellow, or off-white. But in this case, there is a double insult at work. For not only is Barack Obama the son of a white woman, and thus as much a white man as he is a black man, but his father deserted the family “early on”; thus, young Barack was raised almost exclusively by his white mother. From Herbert’s column, you’d think she were a mere white dry nurse, who “don’t know nothin’ ‘bout birthin’ babies!”

(Ironically, in Obama’s case, the term “African American” is for once accurate. But Bob Herbert could care less about things “African”; he refers to anyone with a drop of black blood in him as “African American.”)

Herbert doesn’t even tell us that Obama Sr. was black, only that he was “Kenyan.” Herbert either assumed, erroneously, that all Kenyans are black, or he simply decided to write the Asians and whites out of the country, the way he wrote Obama’s mother out of his genetic code. (Granted, only one percent of Kenyans are non-black, but if Herbert were writing about a region that was one percent black, you can be sure he wouldn’t write the blacks out of the place.)

“In a political era saturated with cynicism and deceit, Mr. Obama is asking voters to believe him when he talks about the values and verities that so many politicians have lied about for so long. He’s asking, in effect, for a leap of political faith.”

The title of Herbert’s column is, “A Leap of Faith.” But the leap of faith is not in support of Barack Obama; it is in support of Bob Herbert. And as we shall see, the propagandistic makeover that Herbert gave Obama was saturated with cynicism and deceit.

Ultimately, Herbert is saying we should support Obama, because he told us to. Herbert crafts two cover stories, as to why we should support Obama: 1. He is a left-of-center candidate whose message transcends partisanship; and 2. He is (as defined by Herbert) black.

Forget number one. Herbert wants Illinoisans to elect Barack Obama to the senate, because Herbert has defined him as black.

If a white columnist called on voters to elect a political candidate, merely because the latter was white, Herbert would shout from the rooftops of 43rd Street, that the white columnist was a racist.

Obama, says Herbert, supports the war in Afghanistan, but not the war in Iraq. Herbert tells us that Obama is a “left of center” pol who believes in “a set of core values that bind us together as Americans.” Herbert writes that Obama’s “partisans describe [him] as a dream candidate, the point man for a new kind of politics designed to piece together a coalition reminiscent of the one blasted apart by the bullet that killed Robert Kennedy in 1968.”

“Core values” talk -- logic and morality be damned -- always seems to lead to the demand that black and Hispanic Americans (and Hispanic NON-citizens!) be privileged under the law, and white Americans disenfranchised. And in fact, Obama is a rabid supporter of affirmative action, though Herbert failed to divulge that fact. Indeed, Herbert provides no credible or substantive information about Obama’s politics.

Obama, who currently represents Illinois’ 13th Senate District, on the largely black South Side of Chicago, is also an ardent supporter of abortion, and a lecturer on constitutional law at the University of Chicago. But has he ever read the Constitution? The Supreme Court’s decisions deeming abortion a “fundamental right” and in favor of affirmative action were, constitutionally speaking, some of the worst in the history of the Court.

According to a fawning, if brief profile in The Economist, “He has worked hard to reach across racial lines, but his core support comes from blacks and white urban progressives, and he has pinned his primary hopes largely on the Chicago area.” The anonymous Economist editorialist also indulged in some cheap race-baiting: “Are Illinois voters ready for this? In a city with deep Irish roots, a local commentator suggests that he might do better as O’Bama.”

Had the writer at The Economist bothered to check his facts, he would have known that Chicago today has twice as many blacks as Irish. Apparently, he only knows Chicago from 1930s’ 20th Century-Fox movies about Mrs. O’Leary’s cow.

But are Illinois voters ready for Obama’s race politics?

I’m not sure what it means to work hard “to reach across racial lines,” but I know that most urban blacks are racist, and that white progressives, in their aping of blacks, are often even more exaggerated in their anti-white racism.

Let’s look at what Obama supports: “Job training”; direct government loans for higher education; “universal health care”; racialist law; and of course, affirmative action and abortion.

“Job training” has always meant a boondoggle, in which billions of taxpayer dollars are wasted on bureaucrats and on paying for programs in which people who have never worked for a living shuffle from one program to another. Such multibillion-dollar money pits have had names such as the Comprehensive Employment Training Act and the Job Training Partnership Act.

Direct government loans, as opposed to the present bank-administered program, would create yet another expensive, permanent government bureaucracy. And why? Because for Barack Obama, not only is government the employer of first resort, but as often follows with such a politics, he hates it when private enterprise makes a buck off anything.

Hillarycare: Bill Clinton’s administration was stuck in a first-year quagmire of his wife’s making, as Mrs. Clinton sought, through illegal, clandestine meetings, and her own personal health care commissar, Ira “the Genius” Magaziner (with apologies to the late, great Ray Charles), to foist on America a socialist health care system like those in the U.K. and Canada. Such health care systems are expensive, inefficient, and destroy health-care quality. People have to wait months for routine medical care, and patients routinely die waiting in emergency rooms. Don’t believe me? Just ask a Canadian or Brit. And this is what Barack Obama dreams of foisting on America.

Law Enforcement: Obama drafted successful legislation ensuring that all interrogations in death penalty cases are videotaped; “passed model legislation designed to curb the practice of racial profiling by law enforcement”; and “has been a leader in reforming the juvenile justice system to keep more young people in school and out of prison, and has fought to increase penalties for domestic violence.” (Quotes are from Obama’s official Web site.)

The consequences of Obama’s crime policies may not jump off the page. The videotaping requirement he got passed is actually part of a national movement to have all police interrogations videotaped. The movement gathered steam in late 2002, as part of the successful campaign to get the convictions of the men who in 1989 as teenagers had confessed to assaulting, sexually abusing, and leaving for dead Tricia Meili, the victim known for years by whites as “the Central Park Jogger” thrown out. (Blacks knew Meili’s name, because black media had constantly publicized it from the start.)

According to the Supreme Court, police are legally permitted to use deceit, in order to get suspects to confess to crimes, but some members of the public, particularly blacks, oppose such tactics. And supporters of videotaping all interrogations believe that there is no such thing as a true, voluntary confession, at least not by minorities. (Advocates’ ultimate goal is to get ALL confessions, at least all by minority suspects, thrown out of court.) Those who support the videotaping of interrogations hope that juries will be so disgusted by detectives’ use of deceit, that they will acquit the guilty, and that videotaping will amount to a “get-out-of-jail-free” card, or that detectives will be so handcuffed by public race-baiting, that they are rendered impotent.

The Illinois legislation against so-called racial profiling requires that all local police departments record the race of anyone police stop for questioning. The legislation’s rationale is that if “too many” blacks are stopped, the police are guilty of racial profiling. “Too many” is virtually always framed by race advocates as being more than the black (or black and Hispanic) proportion of the local population.

But in Chicago as in the rest of the nation, minorities have a virtual monopoly on violent crime; across the nation, their proportion of the criminal suspect population is as much as 2.4 times their proportion of the local population. Hence, “anti-profiling” legislation leads to “depolicing,” whereby to avoid charges of racism, police ignore crimes committed right in front of their noses by minority criminals, or in order to have the “right numbers,” stop whites or Asians for questioning about crimes committed by blacks or Hispanics, thus wasting time and money, and letting the criminals escape prosecution. Another consequence of “anti-profiling” agitation is police departments’ doctoring of crime statistics, in order to compensate on paper for what police may not do on the street.

(Ever since the 1970s, race advocates have worked from the fraudulent assumptions of “disproportionate impact” theory, according to which any phenomenon in which minorities or women don’t do statistically as well as white men -- e.g., income, incarceration -- is automatically assumed to be based on discrimination. Meanwhile, in the sort of hypocrisy that has become one of the trademarks of affirmative action and multiculturalism, disparities that show white men doing disproportionately poorly, whether as school teachers or professional athletes, are ignored.

The initial purpose of talk of disproportionate impact was to eliminate the need to prove that some person, business, or agency deliberately discriminated against members of certain groups. This was a dramatic development, since the concept of racial discrimination had always been inseparable from the assumption of ill will on the part of influential whites. Now whites could be accused of racism for simply following objective, merit-based hiring rules which blacks satisfied in lower proportions than whites. Once the courts began employing this pseudo-scientific methodology, it meant the gutting of the rule of law in racial matters, since the law had always required that it be proven that a defendant had shown an intent to do harm.

A secondary bonus, which academia and journalism leapt on, was the abolition of the principle of evidence. With disproportionate impact, leftwing whites and racist blacks would show disproportionate statistical relationships among the races, and insist that the relationships alone, which were actually mere correlations, were EVIDENCE of discrimination. From then on, leftists and black racists persecuted anyone who questioned their lack of evidence as a “racist” or “Uncle Tom,” and cleansed the ranks of academia and journalism of rigorous researchers. And yet, the notion that white men victimize minorities without intending to, was for its advocates ultimately psychologically unsatisfying. And so, once intent had in practice been abolished by the courts in racial matters, race advocates brought it back, by insisting that a massive, national conspiracy of racist whites persecuted black males through “racially profiling” them. Note too that while disproportionate impact exaggerates the principle of agency in the case of whites, so that they are agents of racism whether or not they intend to be, it eliminates agency in the case of minorities, especially blacks. Thus, for race advocates, the fact that blacks get questioned and arrested at much higher rates than whites has nothing to do with the fact that blacks commit violent crimes at much higher rates than whites.)

Obama’s “reform” of the juvenile justice system is designed to protect violent, young black (and, to a lesser degree) Hispanic felons from having to pay for their crimes. But why would someone who is so lax with violent felons be so draconian with men convicted of domestic violence? For one thing, such legislating -- like his support for unlimited abortion rights -- burnishes Obama’s feminist credentials with white female progressives. For another thing, such legislation primarily targets white men. “Domestic violence” is largely about locking up unruly and violent white husbands. (Violent wives get a pass.) Let’s see. Seventy-seven percent of white children are born to married parents, while only 31 percent of black children are. And so, such legislation is tailored to harm white men. Note too that “domestic violence” law tends to get treated de facto as an adjunct of family law, in which constitutional protections are routinely violated. And so, Mr. Professor of Constitutional Law wants to fabricate ever broader, new legal protections for blacks and Hispanics, while doing away with legal protections for heterosexual, white, married men.

And so, we see that Barack Obama’s legal policies are based on helping black (and to a lesser degree, Hispanic) felons escape prosecution, while exacting draconian punishment on white men who smack their wives. (The prospect of more white men getting raped behind prison bars would presumably excite Obama’s black voter base.) As with other racist politicians, such as Cong. John Conyers (D, MI.), the purpose of such legal “reform” is, by hook or by crook, to reduce the number of blacks in penal institutions, while increasing the number of whites in them. I’m reminded of Surgeon General David Satcher’s 1998 statement, that America’s greatest health care challenge was in equalizing the rates of HIV infection between whites and blacks. If logic is any guide, rather than getting people to stop from engaging in dangerous sex acts, Dr. Satcher was consumed with raising the rate of white HIV infection, and reducing the rate of black HIV infection, or with radically reducing the rate of black HIV infection, while keeping the white rate unchanged.

Affirmative Action: America has already suffered for over 30 years under a system in which incompetents are accepted to college and graduate and professional school, hired to responsible jobs, and given government contracts, due solely to their race, ethnicity, or sex, while qualified people suffer egregious discrimination, based solely on their race, ethnicity, or sex. Obama would maintain such racist programs in perpetuity.

Again, none of Obama’s above-cited positions were mentioned by Bob Herbert, who apparently does not believe that readers can be trusted to deal with the truth. Herbert notwithstanding, I wasn’t aware that socialism, statist absolutism, and anti-white racism constituted “a set of core values that bind us together as Americans.” But then, were Obama a champion of real American “core values” like liberty, merit, and equality before the law, a racist like Herbert would never have supported him.

To me, Barack Obama comes off like a Bill Clinton, another former professor of constitutional law who also apparently never read the document, but without Clinton’s fiscal austerity. Heck, if Obama were ever elected the nation’s second “African-American” president, he might end up as expensive a proposition as George W. Bush.

* * *

Postscript, October 27, 2010: This was the first published version of my first article on the John Doe calling himself “Barack Obama,” which I just dug up at “the Wayback Machine.” It had been published at my Yahoo Geocities Web site, A Different Drummer; Yahoo shut down all free Geocities Web sites two years ago.

To my knowledge, it was also the first serious analysis of Obama written by anyone. I even beat Sam Francis by a week or two.

Before reading Bob Herbert’s trial balloon, I had never heard of “Barack Obama,” but I quickly found out as much as was available at the time about the state senator from Illinois. Only much later would I learn that his grandparents had raised him for most of his childhood, or that the foundations of the Black Liberation Theology of which he was a devotee, were racial genocide and black supremacy. I had read some books by BLT’s founder, James Cone, but not his main doctrinal works. Besides, Cone had removed his openly genocidal statements from the later editions of those works, and I didn’t have the originals.

Rapper KRS-One Supports Al Qaeda (But Don't You Dare Report It!)

By Nicholas Stix

October 21, 2004
A Different Drummer

Voice: So, you're a philosopher?
KRS: Yes, I think very deeply.
[repeated and scratched]

[Verse One]
Let's begin, what, where, why, or when
will all be explained like instructions to a game
See I'm not insane, in fact, I'm kind of rational
when I be asking you, Who is more dramatical?
This one or that one, the white one or the black one
pick the punk, and I'll jump up to attack one
KRS-One is just the guy to lead a crew
right up to your face and dis you
Everyone saw me on the last album cover
Holding a pistol something far from a lover
Beside my brother, S-C-O-T-T
I just laughed, cause no one can defeat me
This is lecture number two, My Philosophy…

I'll play the nine [9 mm. pistol] and you play the target
you all know my name so I guess I'll just start it
or should I say, Start this, I am an artist
of new concepts at their hardest ….

From “My Philosophy,” by KRS-One.

 
The Truth is a Lie!

When a professional athlete suffers an attack of honesty with a reporter, he typically suffers speaker’s remorse. As soon as the newspaper hits the stand, or the report airs on the TV news, the jock will lie about having told the truth. “I was quoted out of context,” goes the boilerplate. Well, “KRS-One” (Kris Parker; hereafter, “KOP”), one of the original gangsta rappers, who led the 1980s/early 1990s group, Boogie Down Productions, went the jocks one better: Instead of merely saying that he was quoted out of context, in a defense at hip hop site All HipHop, KOP said that the New York Daily News committed character assassination against him, when its gossip column “Rush and Molloy,” (the husband and wife team of George Rush and Joanna Molloy, “with” Ben Widdicombe, Jo Piazza, Chris Rovzar and the News' top rewrite man, Corky Siemaszko) quoted him as supporting Al Qaeda’s 911 attack on America, threatened to sue the newspaper … and then said in his defense, exactly what Rush and Molloy had attributed to him, and then some. Apparently, the musically and mentally challenged performer is unaware that the truth is an absolute defense against charges of libel and defamation.
 

Hip-Hop: Entertainment Without Entertainers

A “rapper” is typically a talentless black who wants people to subsidize him, so that he doesn’t have to get a j-o-b. Rap aka Hip-Hop (r/h) has refuted the racist stereotype, according to which blacks have “natural rhythm,” and revealed that the average black cannot sing, dance, compose music or write lyrics any better than the average white. Many of rappers’ rants consist of nothing but narcissistic self-promotion, where the performer brags about himself in the third person. When r/h recordings do include something recognizable as music, it is invariably through plagiarizing someone else’s earlier recording, which is known in r/h by the euphemism “sampling.”

Why would anyone pay for r/h? When Frank Sinatra and Ella Fitzgerald were the world’s greatest singers, there was no question why fans would buy their records, rather than those cut by any random drunk warbling from a barstool. But with r/h, the hierarchy of talent, from tone-deaf amateur to virtuoso, collapsed. But worse even than in an aesthetic democracy, in r/h, the tone-deaf pretend-artist is king, the virtuoso an outcast.

The great singers of the Big Band Era and the Great American Songbook loved America, and in spite (or because) of having had to work like dogs before becoming rich, tended to have an attitude of gratitude for the blessings that had been bestowed upon them. Rappers, by contrast, are strangers to hard work and talent, and tend to revel in racism, violence, misogyny and anti-Americanism.

So much of r/h sounds like a parody of illiterate street blacks. But this, er, stuff is scribbled by people who haven’t an ironic bone in their bodies.

(Yo man these people around here in '87 just slippin dough you know
what
I'm sayin? Boogie Down Productions not slippin dough so hold ya
hands you
know what I'm sayin? (word) Yo! What's goin' on? Mr. Magic you know
what
happened? He slipped on us he die. Pumpin KISS FM we rock. To my man
DJ
Red Alert we chillin' (word). Yo man! Yo do heard about man this
s--t
about this kid Wearin' the, ah, Jerry Curls, man. Word up! He was
slippin'.
Yo dough, word up, word up. He had a yellow coat on, but no
description was
given)
Now what you just heard, people, was a little kickin
But let me tell you this while the clock is still tickin
This is the warning, known as the caution:
Do not attempt to dis cuz you'll soften
Just like a pillow, or better yet a mattress
You can't match this style or attack this
While I'm telling you, write on schedule
F--k with K-R-S and I'll bury you
Deep in the dirt, or sand with a shovel
No fight, no scurry, or scuffle, just muffle
Total domination on stage
Kris is the name, 22 is the age
Those who wanna battle, I know who you are
You got a little girl, you drive a little car
You come into the place with that look on your face
Before you ran the mile, you lost the race
So assume you're doomed when you step in the room
I'll be the witch and you'll be the broom
I'll ride you, guide you into the concrete
I'll slide you to a funky beat
So what do we have here?
A sucka in fear
I snatched your heart
Put it way up on the chart
At ten you're f----d
At nine you suck
At eight you're a sucker
At seven-a m--------a
At six you're slapped
At five you're just wacked
At four you're lost
At three, you're just soft
At two you're an a--
At one, you're a d--k

From “9mm Goes Bang,” by KRS-One

 
R/H and Black Supremacy

R/h’s cultural function is as the voice of domestic urban nihilism and black racism. Many rappers have been supportive variously of the black supremacist groups the Nation of Islam, New Black Panther party, and the Five Percenters. While the aforementioned groups’ philosophies are mutually incompatible, they share a common, genocidal hatred of whites, and the desire to see America’s enemies triumph over her.

Black supremacist writer Cedric Muhammed maintains,

“Now keep in mind it is hard to argue against the reality that along with Minister Farrakhan [leader of the Nation of Islam], there was no greater "outside" influence, during Hip-Hop's most "conscious" era, on the lyrics of leading Hip-Hop arists, than the teachings of the 5% Nation. This is the case most obviously in 1987-1988 with popular artists like Rakim and Big Daddy Kane. To varying degrees Lauryn Hill, Nas, Wu-Tang Clan, Public Enemy, KRS-One, Ice Cube, MC Ren, X-Clan, Queen Latifah, and countless others have been positively influenced by the teachings of both the 5% Nation of Islam [Five Percenters] and the Lost-Found Nation of Islam in the West.”

As I have previously written, the Five Percenters are an ultraviolent, black cult.

(In a recent e-mail, a black writer mentioned rappers’ embrace of the Five Percenters. The writer also remarked that whites didn’t seem to like the identification, “European Americans.” When I responded that the phrase had, to my knowledge, been coined by the black supremacist Nation of Islam, and is today also embraced by white nationalists, he was still baffled as to why whites would reject the term.)

In the case of KOP, as with many other rappers, one hears of their positive social engagement. For instance, in the late 1980s, KOP founded the Stop the Violence movement. As Steve Huey has written for VH-1 on KOP, ca. 1989, “Taking on issues like black-on-black crime, police brutality, education, and spirituality, KRS-One found his audience growing and the mainstream paying attention to his message.”

Based on the English language, you’d think that someone who founded a movement called “Stop the Violence” and who was concerned about crime, would be … opposed to violence. But you’d be wrong.

Keep in mind, that as Carl Chery has written, KOP’s album Criminal Minded “featured the battle records ‘The Bridge is Over’ and ‘South Bronx’ with Kris and Scott on the cover brandishing grenades and bullets.”

And this is the ultraviolent world of r/h, where blood feuds are maintained for the sake of making a good impression, blood feuds that have resulted in the murders of, most notoriously, Tupac Shakur and Biggie Smalls.

In 1989, after a syndicated Jesse Jackson column on the topic, “black-on-black violence” was a macro on every white pundit’s word processor as an urgent social problem. None of those white pundits, to my knowledge, had the cojones to ask why black-on-white violence was not an urgent social problem. (Similarly, today we have heroic, white intellectuals and moralists like National Review’s Jonah Goldberg, who jump on Bill Cosby’s bandwagon, but who have never condemned black racism or black social pathologies, or black anti-Americanism… and never will.)

Jackson, KOP, et al., were not at all concerned about white’s lives. Indeed, had those white pundits hit the streets and listened to what urban blacks were saying, and read what they were reading, they would have seen that the movement to stop black-on-black violence supported an explosion in the already out-of-control black-on-white and black-on-Asian violence. The two leading theorists of “Afrocentricity,” Frances Cress Welsing (The Isis Papers: The Keys to the Colors, 1991) and Amos N. Wilson (Black-on-Black Violence: The Psychodynamics of Black Self-Annihilation in Service of White Domination, 1990), have called for genocide against whites, and in Wilson’s case, Asians, as well.

In a position that remains popular among urban blacks, Wilson argued that all of the violence that blacks visit upon other blacks, should be stopped, and the rage saved up and used against whites and Asians. Within black supremacy, of which r/h is part, violence practically takes on a religious dimension.

KOP has never been a pacifist, not even concerning blacks. In 1989, shortly after founding Stop the Violence, he and some of his Boogie Down Productions associates jumped on the stage during a performance by rival rap group P.M. Dawn, assaulted performers, threw one off the stage, and commenced to give their own performance. P.M. Dawn’s crime was in seeking to give rap musicality; KOP was an anti-aesthetic purist who would not tolerate anything but the ugliest rap.
 

Roots

The longtime leader of the Nation of Islam, “the Honorable Elijah Muhammad” (Elijah Pool; 1897-1975), spent most of World War II in prison for draft evasion and sedition. Poole/Muhammad had not only dodged the draft, but spoke publicly in support of our enemies, the Japanese. In those days, people actually went to jail for sedition and treason!

The Brits did us one better, in hanging William Joyce for his radio performances as “Lord Haw-Haw” for the Nazis.

During the War in Vietnam, Muhammad/Poole ordered heavyweight boxing champion, Muhammad Ali (Cassius Clay), to refuse to serve in the military, when the latter was drafted. Ali/Clay also made seditious statements: “I ain’t got nothin’ against no Viet Cong!” In a travesty of justice, on appeal, the courts exonerated Ali/Clay, who has since been “rehabilitated” through a fictional cover story, according to which the willing accomplice of a convicted draft dodger and seditionist was really a prisoner of conscience whose freedom of religion had been violated.

Despite the Nation of Islam having been responsible for the racial murders of at least 15 (the official number), and according to the author of Zebra, Clark Howard, as many as 270 California whites during the early-to-mid 1970s’ Zebra crimes, periodically members of the NOI who found it insufficiently genocidal, have broken off from it, and founded their own racial sects, most notably the Five Percenters and New Black Panther party.
 

Honest Gossips

Let’s look at the October 13 Rush & Molloy item.

KRS-One, decency zero

If Osama Bin Laden ever buys a rap album, he'll probably start with a CD by KRS-One.

The hip-hop anarchist has declared his solidarity with Al Qaeda by asserting that he and other African-Americans “cheered when 9/11 happened.”

The rapper, whose real name is Kris Parker, defiled the memory of those who died in the terrorist attacks as he spouted off at a recent New Yorker Festival panel discussion.

“I say that proudly,” the Boogie Down Productions founder went on, insisting that, before the attack, security guards kept black people out of the Trade Center “because of the way we talk and dress.

"So when the planes hit the building, we were like, ‘Mmmm - justice.

The atrocity of 9/11 “doesn't affect us [the hip-hop community],” he said. “9/11 happened to them, not us,” he added, explaining that by “them” he meant “the rich ... those who are oppressing us. RCA or BMG, Universal, the radio stations.

Parker's screed drew a loud boo from novelist Tom Kelly, who was in the audience. “I lost six friends there on 9/11,” Kelly told us afterward.

Parker also sneered at efforts by other rappers to get young people to vote.

“Voting in a corrupt society adds more corruption,” he added. “America has to commit suicide if the world is to be a better place.

Ex-Nirvana rocker Krist Novoselic, who was on the panel, yelled back: “That is wrong, man. Suicide is not the answer.

But, judging by Parker's downward-spiraling career, he's already bent on self-destruction.”

 
KOP Fires Back

If anything, Rush and Molloy were too easy on KOP. Let’s look at the rapper’s “Rebuttal To NY Daily News Article” in All Hiphop.

Like everyone I was shocked to read that I and other African-Americans actually “cheered when 911 happened” and that I have “declared my solidarity with Al Qaeda”. When I read my words taken out of context I was shocked and disappointed that the Daily News would go this far to assassinate my character and distort my views.

Such statements with no follow up explanation or interview from KRS-ONE as to what he may have meant or even a complete quote of my point is simply irresponsible journalism on the Daily News’ part. I would never just say something as crazy as “we cheered when 911 happened!” I was making an objective point about how many Hiphoppas as well as the oppressed peoples of the world felt that day.

I am a philosopher and a critical thinker, I speak truth and I urge people to think critically about themselves and their environment. Yes, my words are strong. Yes, my views are controversial. But to call me a terrorist is simply wrong!

A young lady asked about what we can do beyond voting to change the political state of things in our country? I responded not by irresponsibly stating that “America has to commit suicide if the world is to be a better place” and that’s all. I am a poet and I speak poetically. My full statement was "America has to commit suicide if the world is to be a better place.

If you want to go beyond voting American interests must put a gun to its head and commit suicide because as long as we are only interested in American interests we go out and invade the rest of the world. The real question is are you a citizen of the United States or are you a citizen of the world? And so for me, I would say voting in a corrupt society adds more corruption.

I was asked by the New Yorker magazine to discuss “different and personal beliefs musicians hold and the contribution artists like myself can make to the nation’s political dialog”. My views were indeed different and most were personal. However, when I was asked about why Hiphop has not engaged the current situation more (meaning 911) my responds was “because it does not affect us, or at least we don’t perceive that it effects us, 911 happened to them”. I went on to say that “I am speaking for the culture now; I am not speaking my personal opinion”. I continued to say; “911 effected them down the block; the rich, the powerful those that are oppressing us as a culture. Sony, RCA or BMG, Universal, the radio stations, Clear Channel, Viacom with BET and MTV, those are our oppressors those are the people that we’re trying to overcome in Hiphop everyday, this is a daily thing. We cheered when 911 happened in New York and say that proudly here. Because when we were down at the trade center we were getting hit over the head by cops, told that we can’t come in this building, hustled down to the train station because of the way we dressed and talked, and so on, we were racially profiled. So, when the planes hit the building we were like; mmmm justice.” And just as I began to say “now of course a lot of our friends and family were lost there as well” but I was interrupted.

My intent is never to demean or disrespect anyone’s loss or gain; and of course I did not literally ‘cheer when 911 happened’. I made an objective statement about the feelings of those who were oppressed by world trade policies. I was just as saddened as everyone else on 911. However, for many of us that were racially profiled and harassed by the World’s Trade Center’s security and the police patrolling that area as well as the thousands of American protesters that spoke out against the World Trade Organization months before in Seattle, Washington there was a sense of justice, a sense of change, a wake up call watching the twin towers fall.

These are not my views only; these views represent a popular truth that few people are really ready to hear. No one wished death on anyone or just sat and “cheered when 911 happened”. But some of us can see through the bullshit! America must change its approach to the world and its citizens. This, I believe is what all Americans should be thinking about. How do we make our country better?

KOP also told his readers not to believe anything the Daily News says. But they don’t have to take the word of the News. In the same screed, he admitted that he cheered the 911 attack. “We cheered when 911 happened in New York and say that proudly here.”

(And to think, back in 1996, white Daily News “reporter” Gene Mustain blackwashed the 1995 Harlem Massacre carried out by black supremacist Roland Smith Jr. aka Abubunde Mulocko -- in which Smith murdered seven people, before committing suicide -- and libeled the target of the massacre, Jewish shopkeeper Fred Harari. What’s with these terrorists? Where’s the gratitude?)

KOP denied having said that “America has to commit suicide if the world is to be a better place,” only to “correct” the record by saying … “America has to commit suicide if the world is to be a better place.” (“America” means “white people”; KOP surely does not wish “authentically” black Americans to commit mass suicide. Black supremacists and leftists define blacks who support or engage in mayhem as “authentic,” while showering racist epithets on blacks who oppose mayhem.)

But when them come to arrest a
black man, they need 30 cops or more.. well now
When they arrest a
black man, they need 30 cops or more.. well now hey

Years ago a black man couldn't be a cop
They could only be great dancers
When the whole police department was white
Justice, was the Black Panthers
We've been robbed of our religion
our government and social position
And you won't see no quick solution
Until you see the black revolution

From 30 Cops or More, by KRS-One

We can safely disregard KOP’s statements alleging police and corporate oppression.

If Port Authority police officers at the World Trade Center had assaulted young black men, based merely on the color of their skin, it would have been news around the world. Race hustlers would have sued the Port Authority for $1 billion. Just last year, race hustlers succeeded at shaking down the City of New York for $167,500, via a frivolous “racial profiling” lawsuit.

On the other hand, if KOP’s complaint about the WTC police “because of the way we dressed and talked, and so on,” was a code phrase for engaging in the sort of disorderly conduct and racial harassment of whites that so many New York blacks consider their birthright, and that is tolerated and even encouraged by local authority figures, it is possible that Port Authority (PA) police did run black toughs out of the complex. (The PA Police is a regional force composed of New Yorkers and New Jerseyans, and which serves in both states.) For unlike most of New York City, which is daily terrorized by “and so on,” is policed by the racially whipped NYPD, and is a wreck, the World Trade Center actually functioned.

If girly-man KOP were half as tough as he depicts himself, he wouldn’t complain about getting smacked around by the PA police. Since the charge of “racial profiling” is a race hoax that in its present form was concocted in 1999, it is reasonable to assume, until proven otherwise, that KOP is just another black race hustler.

When KOP speaks of “thousands of American protesters that spoke out against the World Trade Organization months before [911] in Seattle, Washington,” he is referring not to “protesters” who “spoke out,” but to anarchist terrorists who rioted.
 

It’s a White Thing, You Wouldn’t Understand

As for the notion that white corporations “oppress” black hiphoppers and blacks in general, white-owned corporations made r/h a cultural and commercial force. KOP owes his celebrity to the white-owned corporation, RCA, which not only signed him to a recording contract in 1987 through its subsidiary, Jive, but stuck with him, after his recording partner, Scott La Rock (Scott Sterling), was shot to death in 1988. And as Rolling Stone reported on October 14, “in recent years he actually served as an executive with Dreamworks Records.” KOP is a creature of white, corporate America.

While blacks have gladly forked over their money to those same white-owned corporations, it is the white public that made r/h the multi-billion-dollar business that it is. There are three simple reasons for this: There are six times as many whites as blacks in America; unlike blacks, who will rarely spend money on white singers, whites have always bought recordings by blacks; and blacks are unwilling to invest billions of dollars in the production, distribution, and marketing of cds videos, r/h or otherwise.

Every time a black entertainment form has become popular, whether it was the art of jazz or Motown, or the garbage that is r/h, it was whites that made it popular and lent it legitimacy. Were whites to boycott r/h, it would disappear tomorrow. Even black supremacy exists as a cultural and political power, only to the degree that white elites and white parents indulge it.

If KOP were merely an isolated imbecile, he would not be worth any bandwidth. But as r/h writer Steve Huey reports, “to this day, he remains one of hip-hop's most outspoken and respected intellectuals.” Intellectuals. Huey continues, “Taking on issues like black-on-black crime, police brutality, education, and spirituality, KRS-One found his audience growing and the mainstream paying attention to his message. The New York Times invited him to write editorials, and he found intense demand for his views on the college lecture circuit.” Presumably, the Times had an editor re-write KOP’s illiterate utterances into a semblance of English.

Beyond the r/h subculture, racist and anti-American statements by black New Yorkers are as much a part of daily life in the big city, however, as are black-on-white racial assaults. And yet, there is a virtual “blackout” on reporting such incidents and statements in the New York media. The blackout is the work of racist, black newsroom enforcers and their white allies. (In January 1991, after I was attacked in the subway by a spontaneously-forming black and Hispanic gang, a white NYPD detective acknowledged that such racial assaults on whites are a daily occurrence, but that for political reasons, “there are some things you can’t say.” And things only got worse under Mayor Rudy Giuliani (1994-2001). The much-vaunted crime-fighting revolution under Giuliani involved the systemic fudging of crime statistics.)

It is because the Daily News violated the “blackout,” that KOP is so angry. (On a personal note, I used to freelance for New York Newsday, New York’s most leftwing daily. In 1991, I violated the blackout, and was punished by being “whitelisted.”)

Recall that KOP complained that he was misquoted, only to show that he had been quoted exactly. Logically, he was engaging in self-contradiction. Psychologically, what was going on was more like this: The Daily News writers criticized KOP. The media are not supposed to criticize “authentically” black men. The truth of what KOP said, is for him beside the point. As far he is concerned, the News was obliged to put a positive spin on what he said, and air-brush his most treasonous statements. That’s called, “respect” (read: deference).

Ultimately, the mystery isn’t why reporters typically don’t report on black racism and anti-Americanism, but why in a case like that of KOP, they occasionally do.

Charlie Rich: Rollin’ with the Flow

 
Revised at 7:04 p.m.. on Friday, March 18, 2011.




 

(P.S. I coded up a video for this item, but it won't show up. I tried twice to publish it, so far, and I'll try again later when, hopefully, whatever glitch is presently the matter has been resolved.

P.P.S. I just posted the youtube coding unchanged, right on top of the coding that I had sized to fit this blog template, but which didn't work, and now it's working. So, although it's probably just a coincidence that the youtube-sized video box is working, I'm going to leave it as it is for a time. You know the adage, It's best to leave sleeping youtube video boxes lie. Alright, I'll shut up, now.)

Charlie Rich: 1932-1995

Rollin’ with the Flow
By Jimmy Hayes

Once was a thought inside my head,
‘Fore I reached thirty I’d be dead,
But somehow on and on I go,
I keep on rollin’ with the flow.

Folks said that I would change my mind,
I’d straighten up and do just fine,
Ah, but I still love rock ‘n roll,
I keep on rollin’ with the flow,
Keep on rollin’ with the flow.

I got my angel-raising kids,
I’m raisin’ hell, just like I did,
I’ve got a lot of crazy friends,
And they forgive me of my sins.

Some might be callin’ me a bum,
But I’m still out there having fun,
And Jesus loves me, yes, I know,
So, I keep on rollin’ with the flow,
Keep on rollin’ with the flow.

I got my angel-raising kids,
But I’m raisin’ hell, just like I did,
I’ve got a lot of crazy friends,
And they forgive me of my sins.

Can’t take it with you when you’re gone,
But I want enough to get there on,
And I ain’t ever growing old,
So, I keep on rollin’ with the flow,
Keep on rollin’ with the flow.

I ain’t ever growing old,
If I keep on rollin’ with the flow,
Keep on rollin’ with the flow,
Keep on rollin’ with the flow,
Keep on rollin,’
Keep on rollin,’
Keep on rollin’ with the flow,
Keep on rollin,’
Keep on rollin,’
Keep on rollin’ with the flow.



You could tear apart the composition and the lyrics, if you had a mind to, but as a record, it just plain works. The orchestration helps, but mainly it's due to Charlie Rich's piano licks and his seemingly effortless singing of a tricky song.

(With thanks to Richard Schulz.)

Byron York: “If Dems Lose, Obama Will Blame Everyone But Himself.”

By Nicholas Stix
Revised, October 28 version published at VDARE.

Byron York: “If Dems Lose, Obama Will Blame Everyone But Himself.”

I think Byron York is an excellent reporter. ‘Tis pity he’s a Republican.

To be a Republican writer means not being able to see the forest for the trees. It means training oneself to avert one’s eyes from pervasive black racism, let alone genocidal black supremacist ideologies such as the Nation of Islam and Black Liberation Theology, the latter of which is embraced by the John Doe calling himself Barack Obama. It means censoring oneself from thinking, let alone writing, that a totalitarian could be living in the White House.

York’s trained mentality as a self-blinding, self-censoring, Republican writer is the cause of incidents such as his newest column: “If Dems Lose, Obama Will Blame Everyone But Himself.”

Assume the polls are correct and Republicans win control of the House, and perhaps even the Senate, in next month's elections. What lessons will the White House learn? Will Barack Obama interpret the vote as a repudiation of much of his agenda, or will he conclude that he made a few tactical errors but was still right on the big issues?

Bet on the latter. All indications coming out of the White House suggest that if Democrats suffer major losses, the president and his top aides will resolutely refuse to reconsider the policies -- national health care, stimulus, runaway spending -- that led to their defeat. Instead, they will point fingers in virtually every direction other than their own. Come November, it's likely the D-for-Democrat that the president refers to so often will actually stand for "denial…."

The White House has given us plenty of clues in recent days as to how Obama will react to a possible Democratic drubbing at the polls. Here are five.

1. Obama will blame voters, not himself…. . "Part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now, and facts and science and argument do not seem to be winning the day all the time, is because we're hard-wired not to always think clearly when we're scared," Obama said. "And the country is scared." If Democrats lose, Obama is likely to fault voters' irrationality and not anything he has done.

2. Obama will spin the outcome as an illegitimate GOP victory…. Obama has laid the foundation for a simple explanation of Democratic defeat: Republicans cheated.

3. Obama will blame a broken process…. a post-defeat Obama will be guilty more of overestimating Republicans and the culture of Washington than of making mistakes on his own.

4. Obama will reaffirm, not reconsider, his achievements…. shield[ing] those accomplishments from GOP challenge…. "There's going to be a lot of work in [the next two years] just doing things right and making sure that new laws are stood up in the ways they're intended," Obama told Baker.

5. Obama will resist real change inside the White House…. His reluctance to bring in a high-level adviser from outside his circle suggests he wants to keep doing what he's doing….

York is seeking to explain “Obama’s” failure to meet the majority of voters’ expectations. But since he never sought to meet their expectations, there’s nothing to explain! During Obama’s campaign for the White House, which began stealthily in early 2004 or even earlier, Svengali David Axelrod was concerned only to hide his client’s beliefs from most Americans, in order to sneak him into the White House. Once ensconced, “Obama” and his henchmen never intended for him to leave.

The people who are angry at “Obama” are overwhelmingly white patriots. But “Obama’s” life is dedicated to destroying them—as well as white traitors! As BLT teaches,

... Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal.

As soon as “Obama” was sworn into office, he sought to nationalize the entire economy, one sector at a time, while at the same time sandbagging energy production, throwing open the borders, and seeking to confiscate all of whites’ wealth. Republicans called him “incompetent,” but he knew exactly what he was doing: Destroying America’s economy, and destroying “the white enemy.” But all the self-muzzling Republicans could do was mutter about “Obama” being a “liberal” or a “socialist.” If only!

More recently, the “post-racial,” healing President has called on his alliance of blacks, Hispanics, and the young, to rally round in the 2010 election, and in an interview on Univision’s Reconquista TV, exhorted Hispanics to have the attitude, “we’re gonna punish our enemies.”

If he can’t steal the 2012 election, he’ll declare a state of emergency. This man has no intention of voluntarily leaving office. And Republicans like Byron York still have no blessed idea whom they are dealing with.

Wells vs. Evanier in Kirby-Crystal Debacle

By Nicholas Stix

August 31, 2006

(This item is a follow-up to “Bruno Kirby, Rest in Peace, Pal.” and “Billy Crystal: No More Mr. Nice Guy.”)
 

Over at Hollywood Elsewhere, Jeffrey Wells has refuted some of the ridiculous criticisms that Mark Evanier had made of my memorial tribute to Bruno Kirby, while also coming up with a fascinating theory about some of the signs that a speaker – as in, Billy Crystal – is lying.

(You’ll see that Wells pays a vague compliment to Evanier, but Wells’ specific comments regarding Evanier’s article politely rip his head off.)