Skip to comments.Why John Derbyshire Hasn't Been Fired (Yet) “FR mentioned”
Posted on 04/07/2012 3:26:17 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW
Derbyshire doesn't do the really obvious racist stuff -- the stuff that goes up at FreeRepublic.com, for example -- like post photos Obama in stereotypical tribal garb with a bone through his nose.
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlanticwire.com ...
I have never seen a pic of obama with a bone through his nose on FR.
We have a mix of people on this site. You're right, race has never been an issue on FR.
Apparently it HAS been posted here. But a search shows that it’s mostly on liberal sites.
Freepers STOP IT MAN OH MAN ROFL
I have a problem with 10c but the rest 10 seems like good common sense.
“Only when blacks admit that they are disproportionally criminal will they begin to turn their lives around for the better.”
Of course, this is correct.
But I wonder if black people don’t already know that their community is falling apart?
I guess they do know it’s falling apart, but they are ready to remain convinced it’s the white man’s fault, or the police’s fault, or Bush’s fault. And, of course, the DEMS are more than ready to keep convincing them this is true.
To paraphrase Shakespeare put it: the fault is not in their stars, but in themselves.
I’m convinced the Atlantic pays for its articles by the word.
Dry, uninteresting and non-original.
Then again the author, Elspeth, has been fired for being a non-fact checking fact checker.
There was a pic of Obama posted in witch doctor garb with a bone in his nose. It was at the height of the Obamacare debate. But this raises the question: why is a pic of a black dude in African garb racist?
I don’t get that either. But logic and reason has nothing to do with it. And the left would like to forget that he’s half Caucasian.
What clan is that tartan of?I've no idea.
Is Elsbeth Reeve the dink pictured at the bottom right of the Trayvon collage, over `Associated Press National Review’?
He looks like a piece of work.
So it’s OK for persons of color to race-bait, but not OK for, uh, non-persons of color to speak the truth? Screw that ...
And all Democrats! :-)
“(9) A small cohort of blacksin my experience, around five percentis ferociously hostile to whites and will go to great lengths to inconvenience or harm us. A much larger cohort of blacksaround halfwill go along passively if the five percent take leadership in some event. They will do this out of racial solidarity, the natural willingness of most human beings to be led, and a vague feeling that whites have it coming.
“(10) Thus, while always attentive to the particular qualities of individuals, on the many occasions where you have nothing to guide you but knowledge of those mean differences, use statistical common sense:
“(10a) Avoid concentrations of blacks not all known to you personally.
“(10b) Stay out of heavily black neighborhoods.
“(10c) If planning a trip to a beach or amusement park at some date, find out whether it is likely to be swamped with blacks on that date (neglect of that one got me the closest I have ever gotten to death by gunshot).
“(10d) Do not attend events likely to draw a lot of blacks.
“(10e) If you are at some public event at which the number of blacks suddenly swells, leave as quickly as possible.”
Derbyshire’s statements quoted in the article are unremarkable in the sense that they are demonstrably true. (Even the “Rev.” Jesse Hi-Jackson would agree with many of them, just not on the record.)
The only thing remarkable about Derbyshire’s statements is that they were published. And we all know that while you can publicly promote infanticide, homosexuality, euthanasia, and expropriation of the wealth someone has worked for all their lives, and can loudly demean whites and Christians, the one great sin you can’t commit is to speak truthfully about racial differences, inherent differences or behavioral differences.
Commit that great sin and pantywaists like Rich Lowry will throw you overboard faster than you can say “white privilege studies.”