Guess what living person Alec Baldwin most admires?

My oh my, what things you do find on the last page of Vanity Fair:

ALEC BALDWIN took the Proust Questionnaire,

"VANITY FAIR: Which living person do you most admire?

ALEC BALDWIN: MICHELLE OBAMA"



This is rather unbelivable. is it not? The whole thing reeks of desperate white guilt. We know what this white man's white burden is.

If only VF's next question where "really, Alec?"

i would guess that Alec's riposte would go something like this:

"do you know what it's like to be a black women in this country? do you know the hardship Michelle like all black women endure every single day?! she worked her way up by her bootstraps against the racist tide to PRinceton UNviersity! everyone always told her 'no', 'no you can't do it michelle' your not good', and yet she overcame it all!"

How deep is your white guilt?

If it were up to the media and the celebrity class and perhaps democrats, Michelle would have been crowned along time ago.We'd have the queen's jubilee down the Potomac,

I can see the scene: michelle waving her queen wave with her black silk gloves on, as her boat thraashes its way down the potomac, we would all bow, as the boat past, the boat of course would not be playing any "star splangled banner" racist nonsence, but rather some Public Enemy, maybe "the revoultion will not be televised". And inside queen Obama's boat, is a salon of Rev WRight and Farhkan and Chuck D, some "Ebony" Staff writers, Barak, Beyonce, Usher, sipping on vodka tonics.

But is this any suprise? OFcourse the media and white liberals love Michelle Obama. She's got it all.

1. She's Black.

Which alone alone makes her good, pure, victimized, and a hero. Also it means that when she reads Martin Amis (which i doubt she does, unlike the book worm Laura Bush who had lunch with Amis in London) it's about 30 times more impressive than when a white person reads Amis, like say the book worm Laura Bush who had lunch with Amis in London.

2. She despises America (atleast up until 2007 for some reason).

As Chris Hitchens has shown at the liberal Slate.com, she's the one who-more than Barak-was into the black liberation, anti-american, anti-white, Rev WRight stuff. Her Princeton "thesis" which Hitchens said is "unreadable" is Rev WRight style ditribe against white america/america. She ofcourse has never been proud of America outside of it electing Barak. She thinks America "a mean" country. And thats just what she's said at campiagn rallys, you can guess what she says in private about America.

3. She's got everything in her life from affirmtive action (outside her husband).

Affirmtive Action gave Michelle not only a place in the Ivy League but a career afterwards. (This is not a uncommon thing, think of how many affirmtive action Ivy leaguers went on to become hack black studies professors.)
She got a unearned place at Princeton, where she produced a "unreadable" according CHristopher HItchens, black liberationist thesis. She then got a career shutting down hospitals and companys with bogus discrimination lawsuites aka she made her money suing places for not hiring enough people with the right skin pigment. What a noble proffesion, obvilously Alec Baldwins thinks it so.

Is this the life of the most admirable person on earth?

But apparently, aids workers, and charity founders, have nothing on people who make money enforcing racial quotas on private insuitions, suing banks for not giving enough loans to blacks, and companys for not hiring enough blacks.

Is this a joke?

I wonder what Alec thinks about Mr. Ricci in the Ricci case? is he the most deplorable person living?


This is just more proof of how mad babyboomers have become.

something new to be outraged about

as CNN does segments on how to get your arms like the first ladys and Obama going grey and Anderson Cooper talks to food exsperts" about how oranges can keep cancer away, that the dismally small number of patriotic informed americans that read the corner, are always hour by hour hearing about the real news of the day, news since inaguration day, has come to be known simply as the news only readers of conservtive magazines hear about.

One such news story that has not been covered at all, is quite shocking and outragous:

Next time your at a Marriotte Hotel or using a computer at anyother such hotel or if you happen to have NetNanny or anyother brand of Net Filter, try and see if you can visit NRO.com. The national review online, the most popular conservtive website on the web and one of the most prestigous and popular of all poltical websites. Or try to mained your way over to Steynonline.com, the website of the brillant author of the essential milestone book "america alone" (the best book on islamic radicalism and the demographic decline of west minus america bar none) and NRO colmunist, Mark Steyn. A website which pretty much stores his articles that have been published in the most respected and popular publications in europe, australia, canada and america such as Macleans, National Review, the CHicago Sun times and many other Us papers, the Ireland Times, and many other publications who don't publish articles deemed "racist" or "hate mongering" repeadtldy at that.

Noone serious figure on the left and right would charcterize NRO.com or steynonline.com as racist, hate monegering websites that minors nor anyone else needs be protected from. The notion is absurd.

Well, if you try to visit either nro.com or steynonline.com and probably many more such sites, at many hotels and high schools and colleges, or on computers using Netnanny or SiteCoach or other similiar programs, you will find that national review and mark steyn is just to hateful and racist and profane for you to have access to.

However, you'd be amazed at what other sites were not blocked at the same time, you can geuss

heres the post from nro.com's "the corner:

Marriott, Me, and More [Mark Steyn]

Lots of mail re the blocking of websites. It's not just my own, but NRO, too. A reader writes:

A year or so ago, I purchased Net Nanny for my home PC. It blocked NRO's "The Corner", due to "some hate content". So, for fun, I went to Al Jazeera dot com, and of course it was NOT blocked. I emailed support, pointing out the execution videos pass their filter, but not NRO. They very explained that they didn't support blocking of Arabic language sites, which didn't really answer my question, of course. When pressed, they refused to identify which content on NRO was "hate". In the end, they refunded my money rather than answer my question.

So a jihadist snuff video is perfectly safe for your kids. But Jonah's objections to the New Deal? Whoa, can't let them get anywhere near that. That pretty much confirms my suspicion that "Net Nanny" and the like are not child-friendly filtering services but just the twilight west's usual self-loathing limp-wristed politically-correct illiterate nitwits.

Whoops, I seem to have just upped the "hate content."

Why Republicans for Amnesty/Open Borders have no brians aka The Snake eating its own tail

In American Poltics it seems to be something like a rule that the most obvious exsplanations, answers and solutions (usually in regard to issues that make white people uneasy like race and immgration) cannot and will not be said or written in the mainstream media media.

Usually the reason why your barber Lou can so often give you a more common sence anyalsis than the entire media is mere fear and corruption. The denizens of DC-NYC poltical and social life who monopolize poltical anlaysis have dinner partys to worry about being invited to, valuable relationships (with poltical powerplayers) they don't want to needlessly squander (by unnescarily speaking truth) or else they live in constant fear of angrying the PC police on the right and left (who theyre friends are) and being marginalized in turn, relagated away from mainstream eminence to the great but obscure websites like Vdare.com (hence Steve Sailer).

But sometimes the reason the obvious is ignored is simply mysterious. For instance, why is it that no one recognizes the tragic stupidity of consertives for open borders or amnesty.

I recently watched a "principled" liberterian argue against a border fence and immgration laws all together, going so far to tell the crowrd before him that he felt the distinction between america and mexico should ideally be one as trivial as that between maryland and conticutt, basically a mere techinuilty.

Could this man not see why his "principled" ideas were- in this instance- self defeating. It would be hard to believe that such consvetives and republicans as George Will, John Mccain, George Bush, Lindsey Graham who support amnesty don't grasp the most basic effects the policy they advocate would have. Do they not know who they would be granted citzenship to in the millions? Do they not know what most 8th graders could figure in a few minuetes? that virtually making 20 million poor latinos citizens (overnight) equals something like the de facto importation of atleast about 16 million new democratic voters who will help bury conservtism.

Karl Rove who in a matter of a few years has gone from being known idoticlly as the great "evil genius" of american poltics to being a guy who is self evidently not very good at his job, would argue with the same myopic logic that made him assure us mccain would win in 2008, that latino immgrants are social consertive and thus are natural republicans. Rove's mind operates like a bad computer unable to do two things at one time. Thus Rove cannot grasp that while latinos may indeed be religous (atleast when they arrive) that they are also poor, and while they may be not amused by gay marriage, they are more willing to vote for free health care than too ban gay marriage and to cut theyre employers taxes.

The fact that anybody who professes to care about conservtism, free markets, limited goverment, indivual liberty can't see how those principles are imperiled by a open borders policy in regards to the southern border and/or the granting of amnesty for 20 million poor urban and uneducated latinos who are remaining poor urban and uneducated even after they become citizens is a bad idea, suggests strongly that said person is probably weak minded.

And i don't think poor urban and uneducated latinos gets across fully the type of people i'm talking about and just how destine they are to vote democrat from now until enternity.

These people will vote republican when either they win the lottery or the Republican party becomes the true party of Huckabee, social conservtive and progessive on demoestic policy. In other words they will vote republican only when the republican party dies and becomes simply Democrat Lite. You can forget all about those fine old liberterian conservtive principles, the term vouchers will become as archaic as the term viceroy, and the names of Hayek and Adam Smith, Rothbard and Mencken will be as foreign to the ear as Carletoon S. Coon. And if only the liberterian idiots and the compassionate conservtive blowhards like George Bush and his lame crew Micheal Gerson and William Kristol and John Mccain and Norman Podhoretz could see how there "hardcore liberterian principles" and their "compassionate conservtism", respectivly obliterated conservtism and libertianism and America itself. There faces would melt right off like the wird Nazi with the scar on his palm did at the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark.


THE TIME FOR HISPANIC IMMGRATION PANDERING ON THE RIGHT IS OVER. THE CONSERVTIVE MOVEMENT IS NEARING WHAT ALMOST CRETAINLY BE IT'S DEATH IF IMMGRATION IS NOT HALTED NOW OR IF THE DEMOCRATS APALLING AMNESTY BILL IS PASSED. ERECTING A BORDER FENCE, ABOLISHING THE 14th AMNEDMENT, ENDING CHAIN MIGRATION, CUTTING OFF ALL ENTITLMENTS TO ILLEGALS, VIGOROUSLY GOING AFTER SANCUTAURY CITYS, ILLEGAL HIDEOUTS AND BUSINESS' WHICH EMPLOY ILLEGALS AT THE STATE AND FEDERAL LEVELS MUST BE RIGHT NOW THE NUMBER ONE Priority of all republicans and of all real american patriots or in the very least of anybody who even remotely gives a damn about the enviorment, national unity, national soveirgnity, patriotism, decreasing suburban sprawl, improving the schools, lowering the debt, better and cheaper health care, lower taxes, better neigborhoods, the black community, limited goverment, indivual liberty, school choice and a colorblind scociety with colorblind laws. For all of these causes the enviorment chiefly among them are imperiled by illegal immgration and in truth legal and illegal mass immgration in general paticularily from latin america and the 3rd world where 95 percent of those who have immgrated to america since 1965 have come from.

The fact that there are even republicans let alone democrats or any americans advocating granting 20 millions citzenship to illegals in addition now to the free health, public education and welfare we alreday provide illegals free of charge is a absolute disgrace. We in 2008 also give hispanics a republican candiate not to be forgotten.

HAVE NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. THE DAY THE TREASONOUS DEMOCRATS PASS THERE DISGUSTING AMNESTY BILL IS THE DAY WE SAY GOODBYE TO AMERICA ON IT'S LONG TRIP TO BECOMING A NIGHTMARE THAT OUR GRANDFATHERS WOULD NOT RECOGNIZE AND WOULD NOT WNAT TO EVER RECOGNIZE AS THAT GREAT COUNTRY THEY LIVED IN.


Heres a video that shows you quickly how appaling and treasnous that amnesty bill is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H01N7y8QO-c

Apalling liberal bias vol. 1

It's hard to listen to NPR (which i once religous did) and the rest of the Mainstream (Liberal) Media once you know about the news such media organizations including even FOX news refuse to cover for purely poltical reasons. This gets to why liberals-although most acknowledge that there is a left wing bias- have difficulty grasping the full scope of liberal media bias because liberals don't read National Review or any of the other conservtive websites,blogs and magazines that actually cover the storys the MSM shame-facedly ignore.

One of the easiest ways to sort out reasonable liberals from unreasonable ones is to ask if they think the media has a left wing tilt. It's one of those oddities -like why kansas city is actually in missouri -that the big media watchdog entinties are run not by conservtives but by liberals so nuts that they claim to cover and expose a media with a ergegious right wing bias! These include Mediamatters.com (which seems to be operated by the producers and interns of MSNBC), Eric Alterman who wrote a book and writes a regular column in The Nation magazine entitled "What Liberal Media?", and Crooksandliars.com run by John Amato (who is for the record a part time member of Duran Duran's back up band). These people must have the hardest jobs around: trying to convince the world, like raving homeless people, that the media has a right wing tilt. Why don't they try something easier like becoming priests, joining the flat earth scociety or try becoming door to door scientology missionaries.

I have pity also for the figureheads of the liberal media, Keith Oblerman, Rachel Maddow, NPR and the whole rest of the gang. They used to be journalists when we had Bush in the oval office. Back then they actually reported inconvient news. They actually asked tuff questions rather than ask the chief executive about his dog. Now Oblerman and Maddow and the rest of the crew are a cross between being Obama staffers and pure RADIO FREE EUROPE style propgandists. They too have a seemingly hard job for they will spend the next 4 years ignoring news inconvient to "the One", calling republicans racists, and covering how great obama is.

Its far too infurating and time consuming to be a watchdog myself. Also I am a real person and not yet a member of the media bubble. i try to avoid the propgandists but sometimes like yesterday i turn on NPR.

So from time to time when i can't help but be scandalized by the bias i'll try to keep a tab of the bilge on this blog.

Instance 1.

i will provide about a 100 of these but heres just one of many

this is news the liberal media refuses to cover. and if you can find it reported on NPR or ABC or NBC or even FOX i will pay you good money

Obama's housing bill which will have taxpayers pay for other people's mortage in order to save them from impending foreclosures will include illegals!

In other words, tax payers who have done the hard work and saved to pay their own mortages and avoid foreclousre will not only be paying for the irresponiciblity of fellow citizens but now also reckless and irresponciblee illegals.

So now american tax payers pay for illegals to get free health care, free welfare checks and food stamps, free loans for college tuition.

and yet no one covers it! you will never hear this story on NPR for example because that would be too intolerant and mean of course. Such news that everyone would be intrested in learning about doesn't past the taste test of the ivy league liberals who decide what news gets reported for such people are the same shameful americans that march arm and arm with illegals brandishing signs that read "la reconquestdora!" at May Day immgration rallys. Liberals like Obama who did just that in CHicago in 2006 and likes to boast of doing so to latino audiences after he demans that those against giving 20 million illegals free helath care and citzenship and welfare and driving licences to stop practising "the poltics of hatred and intolerance".

Instances 2.
i turn on NPR yesterday, what are they reporting on? Obama's stimulus.good but what about it?

maybe they'd like to tell americans something that don't know that they'd like to know like how in Obama's stimulus there is 3 billion dollars for tatatto removal programs.

maybe they could report that Obama has been woefully failing to uphold his promise to cut wasteful spending and programs by stuffing his stimulus full of outragous pet projects that have nothing to do remotely with the econmy let alone stimulating it such as the above.

but instead they don't even mention any of that which people would like to know about and talk about how great the stimulus is, reporting on how it will help build new roads.