A very good point. That wouldn’t stop the Klan and related groups using his material, but it would mean they’d have to quote his criticism of them with everything else or censor him. Either way they’d look stupid. But as as you’ve pointed out, Sailer doesn’t seem to care who uses what he’s manufacturing, as tho the truths he’s claiming to express (and which I admit I largely accept) can’t be perverted or misapplied.

*1 Samuel 4:21.

The last man in America who thinks Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. And how many Americans did Afghans murder? This is what the missionaries used to call invincible ignorance, courtesy of Faux News.

Absent US aid and arms, Israel would be dead in the water.

Possibly true, but only becaus of the non-Israelis elsewhere in the Middle East who have been hell-bent on destroying it for as long as it has existed. Are you really as stupid and uninformed as you purport to be, or are you just another troll?

Reagan was no neocon. He kept America out of stupid overseas wars despite facing a genuine, nuclear-armed opponent rather than a concocted conspiracy.

Oh, sure. Unlike today’s President, who wages pointless wars against countries that murder us by the thousands or shoot at our planes almost daily, Reagan limited his war-making powers to such major threats as Libya, Nicaragua and Grenada.

Absent US aid and arms, Israel would be dead in the water. It will be fighting for survival in any case within 30 years as the effects of the difference in birth rate between Arabs and Jews works through. (In this Israel resembles its paymaster, the USA, which will face colossal strains as the non-white, low-IQ fraction of the population outbreeds the hard-working, clever ones.)

(2) My judgement of America’s worldwide reputation is based on Pew Center polls. Bush’s descent into the toilet among his own people did not occur during the last election but over the past few weeks, as the depths of pork-barreling incompetence over Katrina has become clear to some of his holdout idolators– e.g the editor of The Federalist who wrote on townhall.com that the GOP is no longer an effective vehicle for the dissemination of conservative policies and principles. Don’t be the last one left with your tongue up El Busho’s grand canyon!

Reagan was no neocon. He kept America out of stupid overseas wars despite facing a genuine, nuclear-armed opponent rather than a concocted conspiracy. Ronnie was in the Ike tradition of masterly inactivity in foreign policy. The Israeli Amen Corner made no headway with the man who took the Marines out of Lebanon. The Bush clan, with their international business and oil connections and their ideological vacuity, were the fall guys for the fauxconnerie of the warmongers.

Glad to hear you admit you can no longer mount a convincing defense against the great, central US tradition of staying at home and tending our own backyard. Even GWB in 2000 knew he had to blather about practising a “humbler”, less activist diplomatic line than Clinton to crawl into power. Katrina has recalled American whites to reality. God knows there’s enough to be done building the stockade and circling the wagons to resist the onslaught of black and brown savagery that is going to sweep up the Shining City on the Hill over the next few decades. For an idea of what is in store, read the updated “Color of Crime” analysis from American Renaissance and reflect that there are going to be more and more of these unemployable, fecund youths around… Hasta la vista!

“And you still haven’t explained all those lawless Arabs, who can’t seem to hold a society together.”

Neither can the Zionists- is Israel more safe and stable than Syria, as opposed to richer?

Of course the Israeli society is safer and stabler than Syria. The crime rate among Israeli citizens, of any religion or ethnicity, is quite low. If it weren’t for all those non-Israeli Palestinian thugs looking for every conceivable opportunity to wipe Israel off the map, Israel would be one of the safest countries on the planet.

The smartest peoples are careful not to outbreed: Ashkenazi Jews, Japs and Scandinavians.

“Japs,” huh? Nice. I suppose that in your world, that word isn’t racist, either?

They’re ‘racist’ all right. But there is a role for environment too, and the restlessness of Ashkenazim helps explain why they never construct or create– only criticise and cling on to other, more organic societies, while spreading dangerously destructive nostrums such as those you have fallen for.

Ah, I should have known your damning of the Ashkenaz with faint praise was going to turn to criticism at some point or another. Never mind that most American Jews, Ashkenaz or otherwise, are liberal Democrats whose views on foreign policy have more in common with yours than with mine. Who cares about the details? Just blame the Jooz!

I didn’t use the phrase ‘international community’ and I didn’t say what I thought of the First Gulf War or Saddam.

You didn’t have to, John. When you accused the current administration’s non-idiotarian foreign policy of having “turned America into a detested laughing stock,” it was pretty obvious you were blaming Bush for this country’s image abroad,not at home. And when you claimed that the U.S. was “about to be driven out of Iraq by a rabble of religious fanatics, brigands and remnants of an army which The Greatest Superpower In World History was supposed to have shattered 14 years ago,” it was plain as day that youweren’t a big fan of the first Gulf War, either. And while you have not stated a personal opinion on Saddam, you have advocated policies that would have left him in power in Iraq, with the caveat that the very definition of “Iraq” would be substantially broader than it is today.

You know America has lost in the ME,

You may “know” this, but I sure as hell do not. Between Iraq and Afghanistan holding elections, Libya disarming, Lebanon kicking Syria out and Egypt & Saudi feeling the need to at least feign democracy, I’d say we’re a lot closer to winning in the ME than we’ve ever been before. We’re certainly not in any danger of “losing” any major battles that were winnable in 2000.

you know most Americans are sick of the phoney Crusade,

So sick that just last year, they swept Howard Dean into office. Or was that Pat Buchanan? I forget – who exactly is President right now, and why?

you know that El Busho fouled up big time over Katrina for entirely characteristic and predictable reasons,

How, exactly? By assuming that between Louisiana’s white governor and New Orleans’s black mayor, somebody in the state knew WTF they were doing?

and you know the cauldron here at home is going to go on boiling until it boils over, unless we get real about race.

Where “getting real” means agreeing with you? Get real.

Anyway, what’s so terrible about being a reactionary?

You tell me. You’re the one that objected to the term. I merely suggested it as a value-neutral alternative to you pretending to be a conservative. Calling a position reactionary does not necessarily make it wrong. Depending on the issue, I could be characterized as a reactionary myself.

Ronald Reagan, who was worth a hundred GWBs, turned the clock back in all sorts of ways.

He didn’t call for a return to Jim Crow, as you effectively did when you told me I could “keep your Civil Rights era superstitions.” He did, however, enact the neo-con foreign policy you’re so hot and bothered about, so I’m not sure why you’re pointing to him as an example. If the current President Bush is a “fauxcon,” so was President Reagan.

Yep, you’ve surrendered in *your* mind all right.

I’ve surrendered the propaganda war, sure. Ever since it became fashionable in the Vietnam era to root against one’s own country, it’s become almost a given that any war will be widely portrayed in such negative terms, and if a lie is repeated often enough, eventually people will believe it. The good news is that there aren’t that your lies about race are repeated too seldom, and by too few people, to catch on anymore.

Anyway, what’s so terrible about being a reactionary? Ronald Reagan, who was worth a hundred GWBs, turned the clock back in all sorts of ways. Your straight-line, only-way-is-forward idea of historical change is sooooo 19C Whig. Try reading about black holes and multiverse physics and apply the lessons to politics.

“The sad part is that no matter what the outcome in Iraq, it’s bound to go down as a failure in most people’s minds…”

Yep, you’ve surrendered in *your* mind all right. One heard just the same rationalising BS about Vietnam when the warhawks of the day finally got hit in the gut by the fact that they’d lost their own fellow citizens. America came home and left the bullies and war profiteers behind, sobbing for more mothers’ sons to die for others’ beliefs. Luckily these days Americans realise they’ve been fooled much faster.