Archive for the 'Lawrence Auster' Category

Larry Auster Cancer Resurges Say a Prayer for Recovery

June 5, 2012

I pray for a speedy recovery for Lawrence Auster.

Auster Cancer back.

Others need to step up not step back.


David Frum: southern whites stupid birthers

August 8, 2009

Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

In a recent telephone poll conducted by Research 2000 for the website Daily Kos, 58 percent of Republican respondents when asked if Barack Obama was born in the USA answered “no” or “not sure.”

David Frum:

The crazy assertion is that Obama himself was born somewhere other than the United States.

The idea is so over-the-line nuts that it has been repudiated even by commentators who are themselves borderline nuts.

The white Southern base of the GOP strongly doubts the legality of the 2008 election and the legitimacy of the man elected. They see him as alien, foreign and suspect.

Is this mistrust racial? It sure looks that way. But there’s something else going on too: the trauma of a society adjusting to mass migration, 40-million newcomers since 1970. The people responding to the polls may be thinking: OK, maybe it’s legal for the President’s father to be a non-citizen from Kenya. But it shouldn’t be — the president should have deeper roots in the country than can be sunk in a single generation.

This is immigration Frum supported the whole time and called whites racist to oppose the whole time.

Auster on Frum

Frum realizes mass nonwhite immigration is disaster for GOP

Reading a report by Democratic consultant Stanley Greenberg saying that voters under the age of 30 favor the Democrats by a margin of 19 points, David Frum does a shocking thing: he looks at the data in racial terms and draws rational conclusions about them. He finds that young white people actually favor the Republicans by a margin of two points, and that the big GOP disadvantage is to due to a 78 point anti-GOP margin among blacks and a 43 point margin among Hispanics.

Of course, Frum thinks Southrons are morons.  They are easily led and easily fooled in his view.

Here is the transcript of the recent Center for Immigration Studies panel on Jews and immigration, featuring Stephen Steinlight, David Frum and Joseph Puder.

==Comment at Vanishing American recently:….? ReleaseID=1361

1. Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling his job as president?

NoColl Coll BrnAgn
Degree Degree Evngl Prot Cath Jew

Approve 49% 53% 26% 33% 46% 66%
Disapprove 42 42 65 57 45 30
DK/NA 10 6 9 9 9 4

Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Democrats in Congress are handling their job?

NoColl Coll BrnAgn
Degree Degree Evngl Prot Cath Jew

Approve 36% 34% 21% 25% 35% 51%

Disapprove 54 57 70 65 56 41

Born Again Evangelicals disapprove the Dems in Congress and disapprove Obama the most. This disproves the Christians are the problem.

Born Agains and Protestants are also very close.

The two groups poles apart are Born Agains and Jews. BA’s are 26 for to 65 against on Obama or -39. Jews are 66 for to 30 against or +30. Thus BA’s and Jews are 69 points net apart.
The are also opposite in sign and extreme in size in their difference. So they are really two opposite poles among the Q classifications of whites.

On Obama, Jews cluster with Blacks and Hispanics for him. This is more meaningful than Congress on which some groups may think that Congress doesn’t give them enough, and others think Congress gives them too much so they both disapprove.

The idea that its Christians that are the problem is false. The voting analysis in 2008 I think was similar.
Old Atlantic | 08.06.09 – 3:09 pm | #

Gravatar This shows we represent the thinking of our own people. We are not the fringe of our people, we are what our people think. In thinking about coalitions with other groups, we should realize that people from those groups who agree with us are the fringe of those groups.

This is why we should not give up our positions or curb our speech. We have to nail down exactly the situation from our group’s perspective so they can read it and see it in crystal explicit propositions. We should not hang back in fear or sugar coat it or defeat or our own message by hesitation or weasel words.
Old Atlantic | 08.06.09 – 3:20 pm | #

Interesting numbers, OA.
It’s rather reassuring to look at it that way; we aren’t the fringe. The people who have control of the media and government are the fringe.
Vanishing American | 08.07.09 – 12:00 am | #

Frum is the Fringe.  A truth whose time has come.


Frum was so busy hating Southern whites and calling them stupid he forgot to ask if Obama ever proved he was eligible to be president by showing his 1961 birth year hospital issued doctor signed birth certificate.

Obama has implied or claimed the following 4 items

  1. Obama was born at Kapiolani Medical Center.
  2. Obama’s father was Barack H. Obama Sr.
  3. Obama’s mother was Stanley Ann Dunham.
  4. Obama was born August 4, 1961.

The requirement to be president as a natural born citizen can involve some combo of:

  1. Place of birth.
  2. Status of father.
  3. Status of mother.
  4. Date.

The first 3 enter into NBC status and the last one into the age requirement.  If he commits fraud on any one of these 4 items of information he has obstructed the verification of his eligibility.  He doesn’t get to change his story after he is found out as having engaged in fraud.  If he lied or deceived on any element, then he is a fraud and loses by default.  It doesn’t matter if he could have been eligible, if he committed fraud he loses.

Which particular scenario on NBC applies can depend on any of the first 3 items and possibly the 4th. So if he lies on them even though another NBC scenario works with his new story when found out, he defaults.  If he obstructs our verification by lying and by fraud and deceit then he loses.  Receiving equity requires doing equity.  By that standard, failing to release the b.c. and other files by itself disqualifies him in several ways.  A president must show he does equity.  Obama fails on that.

CHCI FNMA swears in Hispanic Caucus Congress

January 8, 2009

The laxness towards the Constitution goes on in other ways besides the non-birth certificate President.  Hispanic members of Congress are sworn in offsite at the meeting of a non US government entity by a federal judge. This is improper.

“United States District Judge Hilda Tagle swears-in Hispanic Members of Congress”

A federal judge swears in Hispanic members of Congress offsite at the meeting of CHCI which is a legal entity that is not part of the federal government.

“The Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute (CHCI) is one of the leading Hispanic non-profit and non-partisan 501(c) (3) organizations in the country. ”

So its not any part of the US government. So why does a federal judge go there and swear in members of Congress?

FNMA sponsored this swearing in January 2003. Scroll down to the bottom. This was before the bailout. Should private companies sponsor the swearing in of members of Congress by a federal judge? There is a real attitude here of you can pick and choose what parts of America you want and just cash in. No country can last with that attitude.

Comment posted at


CHCI list from link farther up:

Joining Chairman-elect Rodriguez and Rep. Silvestre Reyes in the 108th session of the U.S. Congress are Rep. Aníbal Acevedo-Vilá (D-PR); Rep. Joe Baca (D-CA); Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-CA); Rep. Henry Bonilla (R-TX); Rep. Dennis Cardoza (D-CA); Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-FL); Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL); Rep. Charles Gonzalez (D-TX); Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ); Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL); Rep. Rubén Hinojosa (D-TX); Rep. Robert Menendez (D-NJ); Rep. Grace Napolitano (D-CA); Rep. Solomon P. Ortiz (D-TX); Rep. Ed Pastor (D-AZ); Rep. Silvestre Reyes (D-TX); Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL); Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA); Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-CA); Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-CA); Rep. Jose E. Serrano (D-NY); Rep. Hilda L. Solis (D-CA); and Rep. Nydia Velázquez (D-NY). United States District Judge Hilda G. Tagle officiateed the swearing-in ceremony.

Lawrence Auster at View from the Right

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the Hispanic/African-American/Asian-Pacific/Lesbian-Gay-Transgendered/Disabled States of America

Carol Iannone writes:

I just saw a glimpse of the opening ceremony of the Hispanic caucus in the House.

Pelosi came in 2007.  FNMA sponsored it.


Vote Mike Huckabee or Ron Paul in Virginia

February 7, 2008

Mike Huckabee has signed the NumbersUSA pledge of Roy Beck:

Numbers USA grid for Huckabee and Paul and other candidates including John McCain, Mitt Romney, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Lawrence Auster discussed Huckabee signing the pledge and more here:

“Huckabee further solidifies No-Amnesty Pledge”

One of my concerns on Thursday with Mike Huckabee’s No-Amnesty Pledge was that the Pledge which he formally signed on camera had questionable language that might allow giving legal status to illegals, while the stronger statement that supplemented the Pledge and precluded long-term legal status was only an informal commitment that Gov. Huckabee had made to Roy Beck and sealed with a handshake. That problem has now been fixed by a new document posted at Huckabee’s website, in which the two statements are combined under Huckabee’s byline. However, as I point out below, there still may be something of a loop-hole for temporary legal status. Here, first, is the document:

Ron Paul on immigration:

Ron Paul has also signed the NumbersUSA pledge

These are the only 2 candidates in Virginia in either party who has signed this pledge.

From Vdare on Ron Paul:

4 February 2008

Ron Paul Signs NumbersUSA Pledge

Ron Paul has signed the NumbersUSA Immigration Enforcement Pledge, the same pledge signed earlier, (and much less credibly) by Mike Huckabee. The pledge says

“I pledge to oppose amnesty or any other special path to citizenship for the millions of foreign nationals unlawfully present in the United States. As President, I will fully implement enforcement measures that, over time, will lead to the attrition of our illegal immigrant population. I also pledge to make security of our borders a top priority of my administration.”

Whichever candidate you prefer, vote for them in the Virginia primary. The Virginia primary is winner take all. It is on February 12, 2008. We need to stop John McCain. McCain is still for amnesty and a pathway to legalization. McCain is still for open borders and mass legal immigration and chain migration. Letting the 12 to 20 million or possibly 30 million or more illegals stay means chain migration of possibly 100 million or more under current law. We must stop John McCain.


Illegal Alien non-Texan of the Year

January 2, 2008

Putin can be person of the year, because he is a person, as far as we know. He is not an American, but Time doesn’t talk about the American of the Year but the Person of the Year. That is how Hitler and Stalin could make it.

Lawrence Auster and Vanishing American have criticized the choice of the Illegal Alien as Texan of the Year by the Dallas Morning News in an editorial written by Rod Dreher.

For better or for worse, illegal immigrants are de facto Texans, certainly for purposes of our editorial’s points. To deny that seems to me to be a legalistic argument.

Auster points out that Illegal Aliens are not Texans because transitivity would imply that they are Americans, which they are not.

Dreher’s defense is weak. Were the Norman invaders of England in 1066, English? PC does name the invaders the same as the ethnic group of the victims, but this is intentional deception and propaganda. Invaders are not British, French, German, etc. merely by occupying the country. Americans did not become English when they waited to invade France in 1943, then become French in 1944 when they invaded France, and then become German in 1945 when they invaded Germany. Dreher speak would have it so, but it is not so.

Rather than Texan of the Year, Person of the Wright Island Model would be a better term.

Repetition from previous posts:

==Wright Island Model Sustained Immigration is genetic replacement immigration.

“We investigated various cases of the island model with stochastic migration. If the population is infinite, the immigrants have a fixed gene frequency and the alleles are neutral, the gene frequency on the island converges to that of the immigrants.”

Genetics. 1979 January; 91(1): 163–176.

The Island Model with Stochastic Migration

Thomas Nagylaki

Department of Biophysics and Theoretical Biology, The University of Chicago, 920 East 58th Street, Chicago, Illinois 60637

As pointed out in a previous post:

The theorem doesn’t say you get a mixture of old and new. The theorem says you get complete replacement of the old by the new. The old goes extinct. This is pure genetic replacement. It doesn’t matter if there is an intermediate mixture or not. Over time, the initial stock is replaced completely. Promises of a mixture are false.


So Person of the Wright Island Model makes more sense, here referring to the replacer as opposed to the victims on the island being replaced by the ethnic cleansing. In order to clarify who is who, the best formulation is

Ethnic Cleanser of the Year: The Illegal Alien.

Now surely the Dallas Morning News doesn’t want to say that Texans are ethnic cleansers, now do they? As to the Dallas Morning News they could win some sort of award, such as Confused Editor of the Year. As Auster points out, an illegal can’t be a Texan, so they can’t be Texan of the Year.

==A note on legal and illegal, both are ethnic cleansers.

The Wright Island Model quoted above applies both legal and illegal immigrants. Both are ethnic cleansers.

the gene frequency on the island converges to that of the immigrants.

Legal or not it the gene frequency converges to that of the immigrants. What part of that can the Dallas Morning News not understand?


Legal ethnic cleansers v. illegal ethnic cleansers?  Isn’t all ethnic cleansing illegal?  Isn’t one way migration therefore illegal?


Auster on Categories and Traditionalism

December 1, 2007

Auster comments that changing the categories degrades their effectiveness. Categories are there to organize and make society work. Take away categories and you take away structure.

In programming languages, structures are used to organize
data and are in effect categories. Category theory in math
does the same thing. Categories provide structure in the
world of ideas and of thinking beings. Without categories
we can’t process.

Humans to program a computer need to use categories. They need the same to program a society and for the program to keep running. Traditionalism maintains the boundaries of the categories. This lets the categories do their job.

When the bounds of categories are worn down by exceptions, they lose their ability to do their job. The result is society collapses.

People then turn to Islam or fascism or communism for strict categories. Each of these offers strict categoriesand are popular in times of uncertainty and insecurity. They offer a respite from modernity. The war on traditionalism by liberalism leads to even more rigid category enforcement when the result is communism, fascism or Islam.

Liberalism has been at war with categories and the facts that are the walls of those categories. Liberalism has beaten down the categories and the result is that society doesn’t work as well. The labor force participation rates of white men and black men were 80 percent in 1965. Now white men are at 74 percent and black men at 66 percent.


Meredith Kercher ‘Killed After Refusing Orgy’

November 7, 2007

This story is at a preliminary stage so we should not reach conclusions. The following are hypotheses. We are going to test PC as a science theory of behavior. PC makes scientific assertions. Science is about testing hypotheses. Are PC hypotheses supported by data?

PC Hypo 1: Blacks and whites are identical to each other in their frequency distribution of behavior within group and across groups.

PC Hypo 1-S: Sexual behavior of blacks and whites is identical in frequency distribution.

PC Hypo 1-V: Violence behavior of blacks and whites is identical in frequency distribution between blacks and whites.

PC Hypo 1-SV Sex violence interaction behavior is identical in frequency distribution between blacks and whites.

We can contrast the PC hypotheses with hypotheses that there are differences in behavior for sex, violence, and their interaction and that these are partly genetic.

We can test the competing hypotheses with the Bureau of Justice Statistics information.

“Racial differences exist, with blacks disproportionately represented among homicide victims and offenders”

One should scroll down to see the graph at the bottom of white on black v. black on white homicides. The black on white is much higher.

Thus we reject the PC hypotheses that the frequency distribution of black and white behavior for violence is the same. Using the extensive data set at BJS we can reject all the PC hypotheses.{F3E3CD97-197F-4D31-BF36-A4CBA45FCB13}

“The Truth of Interracial Rape in the United States
By Lawrence Auster | Thursday, May 03, 2007”

quote from Auster

To see the real truth of the matter, let us take a look at the Department of Justice document Criminal Victimization in the United States, 2005. (Go to the linked document, and under “Victims and Offenders” download the pdf file for 2005.)

In Table 42, entitled “Personal crimes of violence, 2005, percent distribution of single-offender victimizations, based on race of victims, by type of crime and perceived race of offender,” we learn that there were 111,590 white victims and 36,620 black victims of rape or sexual assault in 2005. (The number of rapes is not distinguished from those of sexual assaults; it is maddening that sexual assault, an ill-defined category that covers various types of criminal acts ranging from penetration to inappropriate touching, is conflated with the more specific crime of rape.) In the 111,590 cases in which the victim of rape or sexual assault was white, 44.5 percent of the offenders were white, and 33.6 percent of the offenders were black. In the 36,620 cases in which the victim of rape or sexual assault was black, 100 percent of the offenders were black, and 0.0 percent of the offenders were white. The table explains that 0.0 percent means that there were under 10 incidents nationally.

end quote

Auster discusses some technical points related to this being a survey and the white on black rape number not being estimated well because of too few data points in the survey.
==Police claim confession in Meredith Kercher killing

“Detectives said that Amanda Knox, 20, an American student who had the bedroom next to Miss Kercher,confessed to a criminal act. Ms Knox’s boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, 23, from Bari, southern Italy, and Patrick Diya Lumumba, 37, of Perugia, are also being held.

Detectives said that they believed that Ms Kercher may have been killed after refusing to take part in a violent orgy. Police have said that they now consider the case to be cut and dried. ”

“The body of Ms Kercher, 21, from Coulsdon, South London, was discovered last Friday under a duvet in her bedroom at the house she shared with Ms Knox. She was partially clothed and her throat had been cut, it is believed, with a penknife.”

“There were reports last night that Mr Lumumba, whose wife is Polish, had claimed to be the grandson of Patrice Lumumba, the revolutionary who became the first prime minister of the Republic of Congo in 1960. He was assassinated in 1961.”
==Follow up article on case

The American housemate of Meredith Kercher, who was murdered in Perugia, claimed that she heard the British student scream from another room but put her fingers in her ears, according to a witness statement that the Italian police has released to the media.

== Who is to blame?

The whole story is a tragedy. For both of the girls. Who is to blame? What was society saying in the weeks before this?

It was saying that James Watson, who discovered the structure of DNA, was a racist bigot crackpot to say that black intelligence was lower than white and that it was genetic.


* The following is a poor translation: “When my daughter comes home with a lesbian girlfriend, a Muslim or a negro, I’ll know I raised her wrong. But it’s her own choice.” (May 10, 2007 Belgian paper Het Nieuwsblad)

The source of the preceding quote is the youth pages of the Belgian paper Het Nieuwsblad, May 10, 2007.
The interviewer asks: “What if your daughter comes home with…”
Filip interrupts her and says: “That is a classic. There are three versions of that question: what if she comes home with a lesbian, a practising Muslim or a Negro.”
He uses the Dutch word “neger” which does not have the same negative connotation as “negro” in English (although under the influence of political correctness imported from the US it is rapidly becoming politically incorrect in Holland and Flanders as well)
Filip completes this by stating that he would explain that it is hard enough to make a marriage successful when both parties are from similar backgrounds and much harder from disparate cultures, but in the end it would be the daughter’s choice.

end quote

Dewinter was being called racist for saying this. What message did that sent to Ms. Knox? Wasn’t society lying to her? Wasn’t she not being told the truth? We are testing the PC hypotheses. Were the PC hypotheses being fed to Ms. Knox and as a result she put herself into a situation where partly genetic coded behavior for sex and violence was different between the parties leading to the murder?

Shouldn’t the people in the MSM and elsewhere who were reinforcing PC hypotheses already refuted by DOJ statistics be responsible for misleading Ms. Knox? Isn’t her problem that she believed the PC hypotheses instead of being taught the DOJ statistics and graphs? If her father had taught her the BJS graphs and had taught her that “racial differences exist” in violence and sex, then she would have been better prepared?

Do the people who attacked Watson as a bigot and Dewinter as a bigot owe an apology to Ms. Knox and to Ms. Kercher, or her parents? Aren’t they responsible for pushing aside discussion of the data and statistics on the BJS webpage that shows the frequency distribution of behavior in sex, violence, and their interaction is different between blacks and whites?

Steve Sailer

Black Illegitimacy Rate Declines

by Steve Sailer

UPI, June 27, 2003

“Last year, 68.0 percent of the black women who had babies were unmarried, down from 68.4 percent in 2001. The peak was 70.4 percent in 1994.”

We are looking at very different rates of illegitimacy. These are not consistent with the PC hypotheses that the frequency distribution of black and white sexual behavior is the same. But what was Ms. Knox hearing from the MSM or PC blogs? Was she hearing Steve Sailer statistics? Was she hearing BJS statistics? Or was she being told the very PC hypotheses that these statistics are not consistent with? Who is responsible for Ms. Knox being misled? Who is responsible for Meredith Kercher’s death? James Watson? Filip Dewinter? Vlaams Belang? Or their critics who crowded out Steve Sailer statistics and BJS statistics with the PC hypotheses that are inconsistent with the data?

read more | digg story


Neocons: Traditionalism for me, Globalism for you

October 9, 2007

This is a continuation of the discussion of Lawrence Auster’s traditionalism discussion. See that post and linked ones for references to Auster or Vanishing American.

Neocons at AEI and elsewhere have set up a situation of all the benefits of traditionalism for themselves. They have tenure or strong bargaining power or both. They have extended networks of friends who can help them get jobs or money or resources on an ongoing basis. When they get together with their network it helps them advance in getting money.

This used to be true in traditional societies. You hunted or farmed or fought off invaders or marauders together. Your extended network and your livelihood and defense were all linked together. Every social occasion advanced your personal interests.

For professors, think tank dwellers, journalists, White House staffers or Senators or CEO’s this is still true. They have an extended network that helps them advance themselves. Social networking and business networking are linked. They get self defense from this network against marauders like a crusading assistant US attorney who needs to be reassigned or have their case reassigned.

For the rest of us, the neocons want to take away whatever bits of this are left and deny it to us. They want us globalized. They want our network to disappear. We have the social networking of losers not champions. We can’t help people in our network get jobs, because new jobs are at the level of H-1B wages down to illegal immigrant wages. Social networking with us doesn’t help anymore. There isn’t any need to know extended kin, because they don’t have good jobs to tell us about either.

The good jobs are locked up in the AEI network and aren’t available to the rest of us. So we can only network in fear and commiseration. We can tell each other when we lose our good job, but can’t help the person or give help to find another good job. Those are locked into the AEI network or similar out of reach networks.

The AEI Davos network spends its time taking away the good jobs from the rest of the people. So we are living in fear. Our social and family network can’t help us. They don’t have the resources to help us because the good jobs are disappearing. So they can’t help us find them.

Mitt Romney gained his fortune by working the Bain and Company side of that network. He helped corporate managements in small towns see the light, to ditch the people and get short term profits so they could cash out their options. The result is that traditional family and social networks in America can’t offer help, they are just line ups into the work and reeducation camps the neocons provide us, if that.

Meanwhile the neocons and professors and journalists are living rooted traditional lives. They have permanent jobs and places in their community. They have extended networks that can get them jobs or money or financial opportunities. They get regular opportunities to give papers, op-eds, present at networking gatherings that increase their security and opportunities.

They want traditionalism for them and globalization for us. Their institutions push that as hard as they can. For that they are well paid. Institutions which were supposed to put a break on this are co-opted. The Antitrust Division of the DOJ is effectively controlled by Deputy Assistant Attorney General econ or law profs who approve mergers and takeovers.

The investment banks and corporations doing the deals are then paying them as consultants or their expert witness firms and hiring their students to high paying jobs on Wall Street. That leads to higher salaries for these profs because this is what fuels high tuition, dream job opportunities that come from the former DAAG econ and law profs.

The takeovers and consolidation and approvals have been rubber stamped by a small group of econ prof DAAGs who are parts of the same types of networks discussed above. They have written books together, are on the same journals, are part of a small set of large expert witness firms, etc.

DOJ staff econ Ph.d.’s are the students of these profs. The profs write the letter of recommendation to the current prof who is in charge of the econ Ph.D.’s in DOJ. The prof at DOJ decides which Ph.D.’s to hire. They are then promoted by the prof at DOJ who runs that section. The Economic Analysis Group at DOJ is always run by a prof on loan from a university.

From the time a student enters grad school to the time they retire from DOJ as a Ph.D. economist staffer, their entire career is controlled by the same group of about 10 econ prof DAAGs. This is how its worked for a long time. DOJ doesn’t make it easy to datamine the statistics on this, but one can pull it together from searches.

DOJ Antitrust can’t do any action without an econ Ph.D. signing off on it. That means if the investment banks and management consulting firms can coopt the econ profs who control this system then they can get anything approved. Even the merger of Exxon and Mobil would be approved, and was.

The same system is working to offshore U.S. know-how. Russia, China, India, and other countries analyze this system and get in on it. They are taken care of. The result is that the globalization process happens faster and the rest of us lose out faster.

antitrust expert witness

Most DAAG econ profs are linked to the Handbook of Industrial Organization of Elsevier

Elsevier’s merger with Academic Press was approved in 1999 by DOJ. Daniel Rubinfeld, not DAAG then, later put up an analysis that this violated antitrust laws. That was later taken down.

Elsevier charges huge library subscription fees, unlike the case in the 1960’s. This huge inflation in rates charged libraries was the basis, in part, of Rubinfeld’s analysis.

Some of the analysis is still available:

search Daniel Rubinfeld Elsevier Academic Press

“economic analysis”

“economic analysis” “deputy assistant attorney general”

Wall Street hires the econ undergrad, grad students and law students of these profs. That lets the universities charge high tuition, in part, because dream jobs on Wall Street help fuel high tuition. But dream jobs on Wall Street are fueled by the DOJ Antitrust Division approving mergers and acquisitions. No M and A deal approvals, no M and A profits. M and A is a major driver of profits on Wall Street.

This cozy little world has all the advantages of traditionalism. Everyone knows everyone. Everyone has a permanent place. They have extended networks they have known for decades. Most have multiple jobs and affiliations and multiple pots of money. They have multiple secretaries and support people to smooth their lives. They spend their time in conferences and Davos and other resort meetings. The people who were supposed to be protected instead are losing their jobs.

Men’s median wages are the same as in 1973. Graph page 16:

Income inequality is huge.

“NEW DATA SHOW EXTRAORDINARY JUMP IN INCOME CONCENTRATION IN 2004″ By Aviva Aron-Dine and Isaac Shapiro for a graph of income share of top 1 percent from 1913 to 2004.

Income Inequality U Shape Timeline

7 of the top 8 wealthiest Senators voted for S. 2611, amnesty, affirmative action, non-deportable crime, and a pathway for the top 1 percent of households to continue to enjoy 20 percent of each year’s income, compared to 10 percent before Kennedy’s 1965 Immigration Act. The only 1 of the top 8 who didn’t vote for S. 2611 didn’t vote, Jay Rockefeller. McCain is 7th and Kennedy 8th in wealth.

Open Secrets

Rank Name Minimum Net Worth Maximum Net Worth

1 Herb Kohl (D-Wis) $219,098,029 to $234,549,004 Voted Yes S. 2611

2 John Kerry (D-Mass) $165,741,511 to $235,262,100 Voted Yes S. 2611

3 Jay Rockefeller (D-WVa) $78,150,023 to $101,579,003 Not Voting S. 2611

4 Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif) $43,343,464 to $98,660,021 Voted Yes S. 2611

5 Lincoln D. Chafee (R-RI) $41,153,105 to $64,096,019 Voted Yes S. 2611

6 Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) $38,198,170 to $90,733,019 Voted Yes S. 2611

7 John McCain (R-Ariz) $25,071,142 to $38,043,014 Voted Yes S. 2611

8 Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass) $19,189,049 to $93,043,004 Voted Yes S. 2611

More data here

Free fax to Congress on hot immigration bills:


Mitt Romney is the presidential candidate of this network.

After graduating from Harvard, Romney went to work for the The Boston Consulting Group, where he had interned during the summer of 1974.[15] From 1978 to 1984, Romney was a vice president of Bain & Company, Inc., another Boston-based management consulting firm. In 1984, Romney left Bain & Company to co-found a Bain & Company spin-off private equity investment firm called Bain Capital.[16] During the 14 years he headed the company, Bain Capital’s average annual internal rate of return on realized investments was 113 percent,[17] making money primarily through leveraged buyouts.[18] He invested in or bought many well-known companies such as Staples, Brookstone, Domino’s, Sealy Corporation and The Sports Authority.[19]

In 1990, Romney was asked to return to Bain & Company, which was facing financial collapse. As CEO, Romney managed an effort to restructure the firm’s employee stock-ownership plan, real-estate deals and bank loans, while increasing fiscal transparency. Within a year, he had led Bain & Company through a highly successful turnaround and returned the firm to profitability without layoffs or partner defections.[17]

Romney left Bain Capital in 1998 to head the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympic Games Organizing Committee.[20]

He and his wife have a net worth of between 190 and 250 million USD.[21]

Mitt Romney is a beneficiary of the cozy networks that made possible his fortune. Electing him is putting the fox in charge of the hiring of the DAAG econ profs and law profs who manage the technical work at DOJ.


From Vanishing American

Too often, children have no contact with older people, and the elders are isolated in ’senior communities’ or homes, rarely seeing their grandchildren or other relatives, who live far away.

So we are dwindling away, and fewer of the younger people bother to keep up the extended family ties that were so central to the older generations. Coming to the family reunions and to family holiday celebrations is not a priority with the younger generations.

This isn’t a problem for the elite networks.

William Kristol

William Kristol (born December 23, 1952 in New York City) is an American neoconservative pundit, analyst and strategist. He is the son of Irving Kristol, one of the founders of the neoconservative movement

William Kristol is editor of the influential Washington-based political magazine, The Weekly Standard. Widely recognized as one of the nation’s leading political analysts and commentators, Mr. Kristol regularly appears on Fox News Sunday and on the Fox News Channel.

Mr. Kristol recently co-authored The New York Times bestseller The War Over Iraq: America’s Mission and Saddam’s Tyranny.

This links to

William Kristol is editor of The Weekly Standard, as well as chairman and co-founder of the Project for the New American Century. Before starting the Weekly Standard in 1995, Mr. Kristol led the Project for the Republican Future, where he helped shape the strategy that produced the 1994 Republican congressional victory. Prior to that, Mr. Kristol served as chief of staff to Vice President Dan Quayle during the first Bush Administration. From 1985 to 1988, he served as chief of staff and counselor to Secretary of Education William Bennett. Prior to coming to Washington, Mr. Kristol served on the faculty of Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government (1983-1985) and the Department of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania (1979-1983).,2933,2120,00.html

William Kristol is a political contributor for the FOX News Channel (FNC) and serves as a regular contributor to Special Report with Brit Hume, the highest rated political program on cable television.

Irving Kristol

The philisophy of neo-conservatism is two-faced. Its traditionalism for those inside it, and globalization for the rest.

Lawrence Auster discusses Kristol on immigration:

“KRISTOL: I am pro-immigration, and I am even soft on illegal immigration.”

“KRISTOL: And they’ve been contributing to the U.S. economy and not damaging U.S. society. “

“What’s happened that’s so terrible in the last 20 years?”

“as well as his very lucrative speaking career, which by some reports nets him $100,000 to $200,000 per year.”

William Kristol serves on the board of trustees of the Manhattan Institute (paid?)
Bill Kristol, while editor of the Weekly Standard, was paid $100,000 for serving on an Enron advisory board over two years.
Kristol says he does “a fair amount” of speaking to corporate groups and doesn’t normally disclose it.

search William Kristol speaking fees

All those speaking fee gigs are arranged by secretaries at his magazine or at the company or institute. They often provide a private aircraft presumably for himself and whoever he wants to go with him. He may have a lavish suite at a 5 class hotel as part of it and a limo to take him around. He gets treated with caviar traditionalism to say how we should get globalization. He tells CEO’s, take the money, fire the employees. “Take it.” “Take the …” Be an uber-CEO straddling across history like a colossus. While we petty men and women get globalization.

Why, man, he doth bestride the narrow world
Like a Colossus, and we petty men
Walk under his huge legs and peep about
To find ourselves dishonourable graves.
Men at some time are masters of their fates:
The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
But in ourselves, that we are underlings.


Immigration Vanishing Survival Theorem

June 4, 2007

Assume that

  1. Population is bounded from above
  2. The flow of immigrants is unbounded from above
  3. The survival probabilities of the genes of each immigrant are equal.


For any given cohort of immigrants at time t, the survival probability of their genes at T > t, p(t,T) must go to zero as T goes to infinity.


Let N(t,T) be the flow from t to T.

The expected number of genes that exist at some date T is the sum of p(t’,T) N(t’) where t’ is an entering cohort and N(t’) entered at time t’ and have a survival probability p(t’,T) at T.

The sum of the N(t’) from t to T is N(t,T).

If p(t’,T) was bounded from below by epsilon, then we would have

N(t,T) epsilon

as a lower bound to the expected number of genes for the entire flow from t to T. Since N(t,T) grows without bound, so does its product with epsilon greater than zero where epsilon is fixed.

Thus the expected number of genes,

sum over t’ of the N(t’) p(t’,T) > N(t,T) epsilon

But we assumed there existed some upper bound B to population. Thus the expected number of genes will exceed the bound on them B as T grows larger.

So we have a contradiction. Thus there is no lower bound epsilon greater than zero for the survival probability of the immigrants.

So every immigrant gene that enters at time t eventually goes extinct.


Assume that for some positive k, the survival probability of those here already is bounded from above by k times the immigrant survival probability.

Then the survival probability of those here must also vanish, i.e. is not bounded below as T goes to infinity for q(t,T) where q is the survival probability for those here.


Since p(t,T) the immigrant survival probability falls below any epsilon1 for T sufficiently great, k times p(t,T) also falls below any epsilon2. Take T sufficiently great that p(t,T) falls below epsilon2/k. Then k p(t,T) is now less than epsilon. Since q(t,T) < k p(t,T), it follows that q(t,T) < epsilon. Thus q(t,T) vanishes as T grows larger.

What happens is that q(t,T) is between k p(t,T) and 0, q is squeezed between a vanishing quantity, k p(t,T), and zero, so q vanishes as well.


Thus sustained immigration under these assumptions implies extinction of each year’s cohort that comes here as well as everyone here at any point in time.

Note that its only necessary to have one immigrant group whose numbers entering are unbounded and whose survival probability times some positive value is an upper bound to the rest for the theorem to apply to all those who enter and to all those here.


Thus the Bush Kennedy Kyl McCain amnesty bill with its guest worker provision and its annual flow that is bounded from below above zero implies genetic extinction of all those who come here and all those who are here.

So does existing law.

Any law that does not require that annual immigration vanish, i.e. approach closer to zero than any positive bound, implies that the survival probabilities of those who come here and those here all go to zero, i.e. complete genetic extinction.

The causal mechanism by which the law operates is the substitution of immigrants for births. When population reaches a maximum, immigrants must substitute for births or it wouldn’t be a maximum.

This drives the fertility rate below replacement.

This can happen quite quickly.

Assume US population at 300 million was the maximum. If people live 75 years, then 4 million die per year. If 2 million enter then births = 4million deaths – 2 million entrants = 2 million.

The ratio of births to deaths is 2/4 or 1/2. The time from birth to parent is roughly 25 years. So in 50 years, one has 1/4, and in 75 years 1/8 of the starting genes.

Even if population went to 450 million, deaths per year are 6 million. With even one million entrants that gives a survival ratio of 5/6. So the number left after 25*n years is (5/6)^n which goes to zero as n goes to infinity.

It goes to zero rapidly in fact.

The above implies that any law with immigration above zero on a sustained basis is unconstitutional and a crime against humanity. Causing the extinction of a group is a violation of treaties the US has passed.

The current US law is thus void. So is the proposed law.

The drop in fertility from 1800 to 1990 in one graph shows this substitution effect pressure from immigration.

Look at the graph of fertility from 1800 to 1990 below:

Fertility falls except during the period of immigration restriction from the 1920’s to 1965. During part of that period fertility rose, which is called the baby boom. This was a departure from the uniform fall in fertility.

Fertility is now below replacement for many groups in accordance with the theorem.

The same applies in Europe where it also violates EU law as well as international law.

See also
1965 Immigration Act Causes U inverted U in Income Inequality and Fertility

Blogs for immigration restriction even have names like those of the theorem, e.g. Vanishing American:

June 14 to 16 all across America is March for America. Even if you can’t march, there are ways to participate.

See also Lawrence Auster on it:


Kennedy Leftist Awakening: Irreversible Change by Immigration

May 21, 2007

The 1920’s and 1960’s were worldwide leftist awakenings that wanted irreversible change. Teddy Kennedy is a leader in the Leftist Awakening of the 1960’s. The 1920’s leftist awakening used ethnic, religious, class, and troublemaker cleansings in many countries to eliminate the physical embodiment of the culture they wished to destroy. The 1960’s Left uses immigration to irreversibly destroy the physical embodiment of the culture it proclaims it wants to destroy. In China and Cuba, and some other countries, the 1960’s Leftist awakening used the same ethnic, religious, class, and troublemaker cleansings as the 1920’s leftist awakenings did.

In the 17th century, the Puritan revolution was followed by the restoration which undid the extreme parts of the Puritan revolution. The French Revolution aimed for irreversible change. Their method was the terror, i.e. kill the physical embodiment of the culture of the ancien regime.

A revolution to replace a king kills the king. A revolution to change a society has to kill the group or groups that embody the culture of the old society. Leftist Awakenings call themselves culture wars.

Leftist Awakenings use some form of cleansings to eliminate the physical embodiment of the previous culture so that it can’t be restored. The Leftist Awakenings of the French Revolution, Nazi, Stalin, Mao, and 1960’s revolutions in the West and world wide all tried to eliminate the physical embodiment of the previous culture.

Each of these Leftist Awakenings targeted the people or groups they thought were a threat to restore the previous culture in a Glorious Restoration. These can be the nobility, professors, priests, Jews, kulaks, capitalists, merchants, or Archie Bunker.

The French Revolution had the “The Terror”. The Russian Revolution had the “Red Terror”, the Nazi Revolution had “The Holocaust” and killed not just 6 million Jews, who embodied the old culture, but also millions of others. The Mao Revolution had the “Cultural Revolution”. These were all Leftist Awakenings.

The 1960’s Awakening is also a self-proclaimed Culture War. It targets the Archie Bunkers. It uses ethnic cleansing by immigration. It demonizes Bunker for speaking out. It demonizes Lou Dobbs as the Nightly Nativist.

Immigration causes ethnic cleansing. If US population is 300 million and stable, then if people live 75 years 4 million die per year. If 2 million enter, then in a steady state, births equal 4 million deaths – 2 million entrants = 2 million.

Births over deaths is 2 million/ 4 million. That is a genetic survival ratio per generation of 1/2. It is 25 years from birth to parent. In 2 cycles, the genes left are 1/2 * 1/2 = 1/4. In 3 cycles its 1/8. So in 75 years only 1/8 of the starting genes are left. That is ethnic cleansing. That is irreversible change. That is eliminating the physical embodiment of the old culture.

If population goes to 450 million, and entrants are 1 million, then 6 million die per year, so births are 5 million. We then have a per generation survival ratio of genes of 5/6. This then goes like 25/36, 125/216, 625/1296, 3125/7776, …

In this Leftist Awakening, they use immigration to reduce the birth rate below replacement of the physical embodiment of the West. Its working.

“Numbers Drop for the Married With Children
Institution Becoming The Choice of the Educated, Affluent

By Blaine Harden
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, March 4, 2007; Page A03

PORTLAND, Ore. — Punctuating a fundamental change in American family life, married couples with children now occupy fewer than one in every four households — a share that has been slashed in half since 1960 and is the lowest ever recorded by the census.”

The first ever census is 1790. This is irreversible change by eliminating the physical embodiment of the old culture.

Men’s median wages are the same as in 1973. See p60-231.pdf. Immigrants take away job security and that causes young adults to not marry, have children, stay married, and have more children.

In All in the Family, the Left shows Archie Bunker with one child and one grandchild. This is how the Left ethnically cleanses their victim, Archie Bunker. Bunker is a nativist. Bunker is a bigot. Bunker must be cleansed. He is cleansed by keeping him to 1 child and 1 grandchild. His son-in-law has to live at home and has only one child. The Left uses immigration to keep down men’s wages. That keeps the number of babies below replacement. That ethnically cleanses out the physical embodiment of the old culture, Archie Bunker. Immigration is the Terror of the 1960’s Awakening.

Call your Senator today. They vote on cloture tonight, tell your Senator vote no on cloture. That means they can’t move to the next step.


This post was also a comment at Front Page Magazine

Title: Osher right: Noam Chomsky Leftist Awakening Old Atlantic 5/21/2007 9:08:16 AM

Lead in there to comment on:

Causing Versus Defusing Rebellion Osher Doctorow Ph.D. 5/21/2007 3:55:22 AM

Great comments by Osher on Chomsky.
Noam Chomsky was and is a leader in what might be called a Leftist Awakening.

==Patrick Cleburne on Steven M. Warshawsky
Good thinking from “American Thinker”

[Patrick Cleburne] @ 9:11 am [Email author] [Email This Article] [Print This Article]

From a quality point of view, I do not think Steven M. Warshawsky’s posting yesterday on the American Thinker web site can really be bettered:

Out-of-control immigration represents the greatest existential challenge of our time. By “existential challenge,” I mean a public policy problem that goes to the heart of what it means to be “American” and which threatens to fundamentally, and perhaps permanently, alter American society for the worse.

(The Kennedy-Bush Immigration Travesty May 20 2007)

==The French Revolution and income inequality appears in an article today linked to by Vdare today.
Immigration And Class Warfare

[James Fulford] @ 3:11 pm [Email author] [Email This Article] [Print This Article]

Martin Hutchinson, who did an article for us once, has a Bears Lair column on immigration and it’s effect on the relatively classless society that has evolved in the US.

[The end of the classless society,, May 21, 2007]

==Lawrence Auster has been using the idea of the Eloi and our inability to call our Senators to stop immigration and vote for candidates against immigration like Tancredo


search Eloi Morlocks immigration

==Lawrence Auster on their desire for irreversible change

For its supporters, this bill is the decisive act in that endeavor, breaking the old America in such a way that it will lose all power of resistance. That’s why they engage in any lie, any fraud, any violation of the normal deliberative process, in order to push the bill through. They are playing for keeps.

Auster has been a leader in pointing this out.

For Senator Lindsey Graham, its saying, “God, let’s see if you can fix what I break.”


Kennedy profits from his cleansing of us. The top 1 percent get 20 percent of national income now, 10 percent during immigration restriction, and got 20 percent before immigration restriction.

Ed Rubenstein at Vdare has commented on this U shaped pattern:

“u shaped”

Men’s median wages are flat since 1973.

productivity and stock prices go up together, with the productivity of workers going largely into stock prices instead of median wages.


Open Secrets

Rank Name Minimum Net Worth Maximum Net Worth

1 Herb Kohl (D-Wis) $219,098,029 to $234,549,004 Voted Yes S. 2611

2 John Kerry (D-Mass) $165,741,511 to $235,262,100 Voted Yes S. 2611

3 Jay Rockefeller (D-WVa) $78,150,023 to $101,579,003 Not Voting S. 2611

4 Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif) $43,343,464 to $98,660,021 Voted Yes S. 2611

5 Lincoln D. Chafee (R-RI) $41,153,105 to $64,096,019 Voted Yes S. 2611

6 Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) $38,198,170 to $90,733,019 Voted Yes S. 2611

7 John McCain (R-Ariz) $25,071,142 to $38,043,014 Voted Yes S. 2611

8 Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass) $19,189,049 to $93,043,004 Voted Yes S. 2611

Kennedy and McCain know immigration math. Median wages flat since 1973, productivity up, profits up, stock prices up.


McCain: [Expletive] you! I know more about this than anyone else in the room”

lets wordsmith this:

McCain: [Expletive] you! Morloch Senators like myself, Teddy Kennedy, and Lindsey Graham know more about this than any Eloi in the room”

== Paul Nachman at Vdare says call your Senator today.


OK, you want to know what I do, besides writing occasional pieces, gratis, [VDARE.COM note: we’ve tried to pay him!] for VDARE.COM?

Last year I donated more than $11,000 (tax deductible) to the various organizations fighting for us and more than $5,000 (non-deductible) to political candidates who were focusing on immigration sanity. I’m on track for similar levels in 2007. No, I’m not rich, and I content myself with driving a trashed-out 1984 Mazda truck.

This year I’ve made half a dozen 200-mile round trips to Helena to testify on Montana bills aimed at combating illegal immigration.

Since the start of 2006, I’ve submitted about 85 letters to newspapers (with about 25 published), ghostwritten several published op-eds and letters, and had two op-eds published under my own name.

I also send every NumbersUSA fax (n.b. after customizing them) and make most of the requested phone calls—the latter being a distinctly non-favorite activity.


I called Jim Webb’s Senate office

and said to vote against the amnesty guest worker bill and uphold his promise to vote against guest workers. Call now Phone: (202) 224-4024 Fax: 202-228-6363. You can call the district offices if the main number is busy.

Senator John Warner’s number was busy two times.

I called Warner’s main number again and it was busy around noon. Then I called a district office and got through. My message for the Senator was I was against amnesty and to vote no on cloture. Call now. Whenever you read this, call.

I also tried calling the White House and the RNC. The White House just rang. The RNC I left a voice mail against amnesty.

RNC 202.863.8500

White House Comment Line: (202) 456-1414

I tried to leave a message but it just rang and rang.

==Call Your state party GOP

Tell them you want no amnesty, no guest worker and no legal immigration until women, Hispanic and black median wages catch up with all men’s median wages. If they’ll listen also say you want all men, black, white, Asian and Hispanic men’s labor participation rates to get back to the 80 percent in 1965 before we have any more immigration. The misery index for a society is not the unemployment rate its 100 minus the male labor participation rate. Our society has a misery index that is running a huge fever.


Senator Jim Webb and Senator John Warner both voted aye on cloture.  Cloture meant to stop debate on the motion to allow the bill to come to the floor. This advanced the bill.

Jim Webb promised to vote against guest worker. This bill has 400,000 guest workers with an adjustable cap. Both have supported this guest worker and amnesty bill that is harming Virginia. These are not the views of their constituents.

Warner is the 21st wealthiest Senator as of 2005. Immigration keeps men’s median wages to the 1973 level and all others below that, women, black men, Hispanic men, etc. These Senators voted for their personal stock portfolios against the median wages of their constituents. Webb’s pledge to vote against guest workers was not upheld by his vote on Monday May 21, 2007.



“This Is the Year”Don’t expect Pelosi to kill semi-amnesty.

P.P.S.: Will backers of “comprehensive” immigration reform continue to tout approving poll numbers from polls that specifically cited the now-defunct “back taxes” requirement before asking voters for their opinion about semi-amnesty? The CNN poll of May 4, 2007, for example, got a large favorable response when it asked if people favored

“Creating a program that would allow illegal immigrants already living in the United States for a number of years to stay in this country and apply for U.S. citizenship if they had a job and paid back taxes.” [E.A.]

I wonder what the response would be to a query about favoring

“Creating a program that would allow illegal immigrants already living in the United States for a number of years to stay in this country and apply for U.S. citizenship even if they don’t pay back taxes.”

==What Republican candidates for President should say:

No amnesty and pause all legal immigration including student visas until

  1. Median wages of blacks, Hispanics, and women catch up with those of all men.
  2. Labor force participation rates of black, Hispanic, Asian, and white men return to the 80 percent level before Kennedy’s 1965 Immigration Act.

Labor force participation rates including for men and women by ethnic group, black, Hispanic, Asian and white at BLS:

(You can download an excel viewer)

All 4 groups of men are projected to decline in labor force participation rates from 2004 to 2014 by the BLS because of immigration and illegals staying, one way or another.

Men’s and women’s median wages graph page 18:

Note that men’s median wages are flat since 1973.

Bloomberg is considering running, presumably to guarantee that men’s median wages stay at the 1973 level by continued immigration and that stock prices continue their rise from the impact of legal immigration since the 1965 Immigration Act.


The way to acknowledge Nachman’s Contribution is to call your Senators today.

%d bloggers like this: