Skip to comments.Talking Back
Posted on 04/12/2012 5:29:11 AM PDT by reaganaut1
The topic here is of course my Takis Mag column of last week, which has brought me worldwide fame, though no doubt only for the proverbial fifteen minutes.
Was it a suicide column? Many people have surmised that I was fed up with National Review and wanted to go out with a bang.
Nothing of the sort. I was comfortable at NR and honestly thought I was writing a routine column on a website that anyway never references my NR connections. The results were entirely unanticipated.
Grassy knolls. Some people went berserk overanalyzing the situation. Guys: Most things are as simple as they look, if not simpler.
A favorite (e.g., with Gucci Little Piggys Chuck Rudd) was the cryptic muttering with which I opened the March 30 edition of Radio Derb. A-ha! said the amateur cryptanalysts, Derb was signaling that hes through with National Review and about to press the plunger on his suicide vest!
Fiddlesticks. I was making an ad hoc spoof on the incident where Barack Obama left his microphone on while talking with Dmitry Medvedev. Thats all.
Although if you were to extract that sound clip and play it backward .
Was it the meds talking? I dont think so. My current chemotherapy regime runs on a four-week cycle. There are two days of infusioni.e., getting various kinds of poison pumped into my veins. This is followed by three or four days of death-where-is-thy-sting? misery, then a slow return to normal just in time for the next infusion. The offending column was written near the end of the cycle, when I was as normal as I get.
Perfectly clearheaded, though? As best I can judge, yes; but theres an infinite regress lurking in there somewhere.
(Excerpt) Read more at takimag.com ...
Why I should care what this femme thinks about himself is a mystery.
Many of the comments on the Taki site completely miss the point of what John is saying. They reference blacks being genetically inferior as the reason behind the various statistical facts John cites.
JD specifically says he is not commenting on why these are statistical facts, merely that they are and what are the appropriate implications to draw from them. The cause may be genetic, cultural or some combination.
But, according to John, one doesn’t have to determine why the laws of intertia work to understand that walking out into traffic without looking both ways is a bad idea.
BTW, it is interesting nobody wants to look at the big hairy primate in the room. Nobody objects to parents telling their daughters (or sons) to be more careful around men than around women.
That men commit crimes, particularly against women, at a higher rate than women is simply a fact.
Is the reason for this genetic or cultural? Who knows? Who cares?
But parents who teach their daughters it would be bigoted to think twice about climbing in with a carload of men versus accepting a ride from a carload of women are quite likely to get a tragic phone call some early morning.
I’m a guy. Do I obsess that men are “unfairly” tagged as more criminal than women? Nope. Who do I blame? The men who commit these crimes. Do I spring automatically to the defense of any man accused of a crime? Nope, if they ever need somebody to push the button on the rapist-murderer, I’m your boy.
Most everything Derb said about the predatory nature of a significant number of blacks in inner city Baltimore has been proven true. Check out the crime rate and the video of the white guy being beaten by a black gang while other blacks cheered and laughed. Also check out the venereal disease rate, the illegitimacy rate, and the welfare rate.
So why is this guy being pilloried?
I know it is normal to comment on hypocrisy when we see it but we see it so often it is beginnng to appear unnecessary. The Democrats and media are liars, period. They care only for power. They use "issues", like racism, the poor, women, children, the environment, health care, etc., as wedge issues to divide us, their enemies, from the rest of society. They don't care about any of those things. They seek only the power to control the rest of us.
Lying is a time honored tactic they use to great effect. Double standard, schmuble standard, what do they care. They say whatever is effective at the moment regardless of what they have said in the past or may say in the future. They are amoral and they have an easy time out arguing moral conservatives. They make up statistics out of thin air and get away with it. They promise the moon and deliver a bed time story. Since the media are in cahoots with them they rarely get called on their lies and people accept them as truth. Examples of hypocrisy are abundant.
And some of what Derbyshire said were good admonitions, too. However un PC they appear to be.
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than other animals.
All Derbyshire did was to have the courage to have that “honest conversation on race” Holder challenged us to have. Most of understood that by “honest”, what Holder actually meant was that whites haven’t beaten their breasts and torn their hair enough while crying, for the millionth time, “mea culpa”. That’s the only “honest” conversation permissable. When Derbyshire took him at his word and wrote the truth, he broke the unspoken rule as to what constitutes “honest” talk regarding race. Every statistic he quoted is the truth.
Very true. Remember this whole thing started as a response to "the talk" blacks supposedly need to have with their kids about how horribly racist white Amerikkka is and how they threatened they will always be. The truth is the average white faces much more danger from blacks than vice versa, as Derbyshire pointed out.