vdare--2020-09-19--Her Name Is Wilma Hochstetler: White Woman Murdered by Group of Blacks In Indianapolis; Young Son Sa

Her Name Is Wilma Hochstetler: White Woman Murdered by Group of Blacks In Indianapolis; Young Son Says, ‘I Wish They Didn’t Shoot My Mommy'.

Previously by Paul Kersey : In a Just World , the Murderer of Amanda Blackburn Would be Publicly Hanged by the State Both victims of brutal black on violence in Indianapolis .
Names you ’ ve never heard , drowned out in the cacophony of “ Justice for George Floyd , ” and “ Black Lives Matter.
” Her name is Wilma Hochstetler .
Yet another white woman murdered by blacks in Indianapolis .
A woman died and her husband was critically injured in a shooting on the west side early Thursday , police said .
The Marion County coroner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wilma Hochstetler , 40 , of Worthington , Indiana .
Jonathan Hochstetler was shot in the upper neck area and transported to an area hospital , according to loved ones .
Jonathan Hochstetler is conscious and was able to speak to his parents at the hospital .
He has broken bones in his neck and jaw and went into surgery Thursday afternoon , according to his father .
Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department spokesperson Samone Burris said officers found the couple suffering from apparent gunshot wounds at about 1:30 a.m. Thursday near the 3000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Police have not yet released additional information about the shooting or a possible suspect .
Sam Hochstetler , Jonathan ’ s father , said his son was at a work site — he owns a roofing and gutter company — on the west side of Indianapolis at around 7 p.m. Wednesday .
A tire on his trailer had blown out .
Jonathan Hochstetler sent two workers with the truck to Worthington , about an hour and a half from Indianapolis .
Wilma Hochstetler then drove to Indianapolis with the truck , a spare @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 6-year-old son .
“ It got after midnight , ” Sam Hochstetler said .
“ They fixed the tire , they ’ re ready to leave and then the running lights of the trailer didn ’ t work.
” As the couple was fixing the trailer lights , two men walked up to them , pulled out guns and took the couple ’ s money and Wilma Hochstetler ’ s cellphone , Sam Hochstetler said .
“ Jonathan told us that ( the robbers ) turned around and started to walk away , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a sudden , they just turned and shot .
His wife was instantly killed .
Jonathan was hit through the neck.
” Jonathan Hochstetler eventually got up and walked to the car , where his son handed him a phone to call the police .
Sam Hochstetler said his son was taken to the hospital and his grandson was taken to Child Protective Services .
The child is now with family .
“ He said ‘ I wish they didn ’ t shoot my mommy ’ as soon as he got home @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( But I think ) he is still oblivious to what happened.
” The Hochstetlers also have three other children , aged 16 , 13 and 10 .

Previously by Paul Kersey: In a Just World, the Murderer of Amanda Blackburn Would be Publicly Hanged by the State
Amanda Blackburn.
Nathan Trapuzzano.
Both victims of brutal black on violence in Indianapolis.
Names you’ve never heard, drowned out in the cacophony of “Justice for George Floyd,” and “Black Lives Matter.”
Her name is Wilma Hochstetler. Yet another white woman murdered by blacks in Indianapolis.
A woman died and her husband was critically injured in a shooting on the west side early Thursday, police said. The Marion County coroner’s office identified the woman as Wilma Hochstetler, 40, of Worthington, Indiana. Jonathan Hochstetler was shot in the upper neck area and transported to an area hospital, according to loved ones. Jonathan Hochstetler is conscious and was able to speak to his parents at the hospital. He has broken bones in his neck and jaw and went into surgery Thursday afternoon, according to his father. Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department spokesperson Samone Burris said officers found the couple suffering from apparent gunshot wounds at about 1:30 a.m. Thursday near the 3000 block of North High School Road. Police have not yet released additional information about the shooting or a possible suspect. Sam Hochstetler, Jonathan’s father, said his son was at a work site — he owns a roofing and gutter company — on the west side of Indianapolis at around 7 p.m. Wednesday. A tire on his trailer had blown out. Jonathan Hochstetler sent two workers with the truck to Worthington, about an hour and a half from Indianapolis. Wilma Hochstetler then drove to Indianapolis with the truck, a spare trailer tire and the couple’s 6-year-old son. “It got after midnight,” Sam Hochstetler said. “They fixed the tire, they’re ready to leave and then the running lights of the trailer didn’t work.” As the couple was fixing the trailer lights, two men walked up to them, pulled out guns and took the couple’s money and Wilma Hochstetler’s cellphone, Sam Hochstetler said. “Jonathan told us that (the robbers) turned around and started to walk away,” Sam Hochstetler said. “All of a sudden, they just turned and shot. His wife was instantly killed. Jonathan was hit through the neck.” Jonathan Hochstetler eventually got up and walked to the car, where his son handed him a phone to call the police. Sam Hochstetler said his son was taken to the hospital and his grandson was taken to Child Protective Services. The child is now with family. “He said ‘I wish they didn’t shoot my mommy’ as soon as he got home,” Sam Hochstetler said. “(But I think) he is still oblivious to what happened.” The Hochstetlers also have three other children, aged 16, 13 and 10.
‘I wish they didn’t shoot my mommy.’
There’s nothing else to say. A white woman was murdered and her husband was shot through the neck, and her young son said, ‘I wish they didn’t shoot my mommy’.
The most revolutionary act you can do in 2020 America is simply state White Lives Matter Too.
[Comment at Unz.com]


vdare--2020-09-19--After 4 Months of Nonstop Blackness, Will Feminists Demand to Own the Autumn?

It would seem like the least we could do for the feminists after ignoring them all summer is to extend @ @ @ @ @ well as Blacks ( but not , of course , to men or whites ) @

Will the Summer of Blackness be followed by the Autumn of Feminism?
If on Saturday another black male criminal gets shot by a white policeman while violently resisting arrest, what will be the lead headline on Sunday? — Steve Sailer (@Steve_Sailer) September 19, 2020
It would seem like the least we could do for the feminists after ignoring them all summer is to extend reverential capitalization to Women as well as Blacks (but not, of course, to men or whites).
[Comment at Unz.com]


vdare--2020-09-19--NEW YORKER: White People Must Start To Realize That Beethoven, Mozart, Bach, Wagner, Verdi, Debussy,

NEW YORKER: White People Must Start To Realize That Beethoven, Mozart, Bach, Wagner, Verdi, Debussy, And Strauss Were All White

From The New Yorker : The field must acknowledge a history of systemic racism while also giving new weight to Black composers , musicians , and listeners .
… What Ewell calls “ the white racial frame ” —he takes the term from the sociologist Joe Feagin—has the special power of being invisible .
Thurman , in her paper “ Performing Lieder , Hearing Race , ” makes a similar point : “ Classical music , like whiteness itself , is frequently racially unmarked and presented as universal—until people of color start performing it.
” The hysterical complaints that Ewell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ classical canon stemmed mainly from a blog post in which he called Beethoven an “ above-average composer ” who has been “ propped up by the white-male frame , both consciously and subconsciously , with descriptors such as genius , master , and masterwork.
” … Ewell provokes with a higher purpose : he is goading a classical culture that awards the vast majority of performances to a tight circle of superstars , shutting out female and nonwhite composers who , until the mid-twentieth century , had little chance of making a career @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mentality is as entrenched as ever .
The whiteness of classical music is , above all , an American problem .
… Classical-music institutions have just begun to work through the racist past .
Scores of opera houses , orchestras , chamber-music societies , and early-music ensembles have declared solidarity with Black Lives Matter , in sometimes awkward prose .
Because of covid-19 , most performance schedules that had been announced for the 2020-21 season have been jettisoned , and the drastically reduced programs that have emerged in their place contain a noticeable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virus hit , we were in the midst of the so-called Beethoven Year—a gratuitously excessive celebration of the two-hundred-and-fiftieth birthday of a composer who hardly needs any extra publicity .
There are always people who haven ’ t yet been exposed to Beethoven who benefit from anniversary celebrations .
I can recall all the publicity given to Beethoven ’ s 200th birthday in 1970 , especially by Charles M. Schulz ’ s Peanuts comic strip : In reality , for every worthy black composer of classical music there are probably , say , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ almost completely forgotten today .
Think about the best athlete you knew growing up .
He probably topped out at say Double AA ball in the minor leagues or the like .
Well , Europe has had over the last 400 years maybe 100,000 composers of the equivalent skill .
Heck , the European classical heritage is so enormously rich that lots of music even by the immortals has been forgotten .
For example , my favorite Pacific Opera Project production of the last few years was Rossini ’ s La Gazzetta , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its second production in the United States since the 19th Century .
And Rossini is an all-time top half-dozen opera composer .
* In the same vein , mainstream organizations are giving more attention to a Black classical repertory : the elegantly virtuosic eighteenth-century scores of Joseph Bologne ; the folkloric symphonies of Price , Still , and Dawson ; the African-inflected operas of Harry Lawrence Freeman and Shirley Graham Du Bois .
Yet such activity goes only so far in challenging an obsessive worship of the past .
These works remain largely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tradition : … Furthermore , this programming leaves intact the assumption that musical greatness resides in a bygone golden age .
White Europeans remain in the majority , with Beethoven retaining pride of place in the lightly renovated , diversified pantheon .
… The Met has yet to present an opera by a Black composer , though a production of Terence Blanchard ’ s “ Fire Shut Up in My Bones ” is planned for a future season… .
That sounds dire .
As you may recall , when Spike Lee ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ long ago in the 1980s , he employed his father , a veteran jazz musician , to score his movies .
But then his widowed father remarried , to a white Jewish woman , breaking Spike ’ s heart .
He fired his dad and hired the depressing Blanchard , and his movies have mostly been bad ever since .
But of course Western classical music is the master language of music .
For example , gamelan music , while cute , isn ’ t exactly Beethoven or Wagner .
We have the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and of the world ’ s movie fans , who expect film scores based on the 19th Century Romantic tradition .
Basically , the Woke argument comes down to : Beethoven couldn ’ t have been all that : after all , he was white .
But he was .
Between now and Beethoven ’ s 250th birthday in December , we are going to be told countless times by the Wokely enlightened that Beethoven enjoyed White Privilege .
You might think that they would strategically decide that it doesn ’ t help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all , Beethoven is Beethoven .
The smart thing would be to not remind white people that Beethoven was white and they hate him for that .
But they are so twisted by ressentiment that they just can ’ t help themselves .
* Here , via OperaBase , are most performed composers from 2004-2019 of classical vocal works ( operas , operettas , oratorios , etc . )
: It ’ s a steep pyramid with tough competition : e.g .
Bach is barely 1 % as popular as Verdi .
Two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Mozart at 35 , but also Bizet ( Carmen ) at 36 .
Here ’ s a speculative essay on what Mozart would have composed if he ’ d lived out his three score and ten , such as around 1810 an opera of Faust with a libretto by Goethe himself .

From the New Yorker:
Black Scholars Confront White Supremacy in Classical Music The field must acknowledge a history of systemic racism while also giving new weight to Black composers, musicians, and listeners. By Alex Ross September 14, 2020 … What Ewell calls “the white racial frame”—he takes the term from the sociologist Joe Feagin—has the special power of being invisible. Thurman, in her paper “Performing Lieder, Hearing Race,” makes a similar point: “Classical music, like whiteness itself, is frequently racially unmarked and presented as universal—until people of color start performing it.” The hysterical complaints that Ewell was proposing to “cancel” the classical canon stemmed mainly from a blog post in which he called Beethoven an “above-average composer” who has been “propped up by the white-male frame, both consciously and subconsciously, with descriptors such as genius, master, and masterwork.” … Ewell provokes with a higher purpose: he is goading a classical culture that awards the vast majority of performances to a tight circle of superstars, shutting out female and nonwhite composers who, until the mid-twentieth century, had little chance of making a career. In some ways, that Valhalla mentality is as entrenched as ever. The whiteness of classical music is, above all, an American problem. … Classical-music institutions have just begun to work through the racist past. Scores of opera houses, orchestras, chamber-music societies, and early-music ensembles have declared solidarity with Black Lives Matter, in sometimes awkward prose. Because of covid-19, most performance schedules that had been announced for the 2020-21 season have been jettisoned, and the drastically reduced programs that have emerged in their place contain a noticeable uptick in Black names. When the virus hit, we were in the midst of the so-called Beethoven Year—a gratuitously excessive celebration of the two-hundred-and-fiftieth birthday of a composer who hardly needs any extra publicity.
There are always people who haven’t yet been exposed to Beethoven who benefit from anniversary celebrations. I can recall all the publicity given to Beethoven’s 200th birthday in 1970, especially by Charles M. Schulz’s Peanuts comic strip:
It remains to be seen whether this modest shift toward Black composers will endure beyond the chaotic year 2020. …
In reality, for every worthy black composer of classical music there are probably, say, 1,000 even better white composers who are almost completely forgotten today.
Think about the best athlete you knew growing up. He probably topped out at say Double AA ball in the minor leagues or the like. Well, Europe has had over the last 400 years maybe 100,000 composers of the equivalent skill.
Heck, the European classical heritage is so enormously rich that lots of music even by the immortals has been forgotten. For example, my favorite Pacific Opera Project production of the last few years was Rossini’s La Gazzetta, in what appears to have been only its second production in the United States since the 19th century. And Rossini is an all-time top half-dozen opera composer. *
In the same vein, mainstream organizations are giving more attention to a Black classical repertory: the elegantly virtuosic eighteenth-century scores of Joseph Bologne; the folkloric symphonies of Price, Still, and Dawson; the African-inflected operas of Harry Lawrence Freeman and Shirley Graham Du Bois. Yet such activity goes only so far in challenging an obsessive worship of the past. These works remain largely within the boundaries of the Western European tradition: … Furthermore, this programming leaves intact the assumption that musical greatness resides in a bygone golden age. White Europeans remain in the majority, with Beethoven retaining pride of place in the lightly renovated, diversified pantheon. … The Met has yet to present an opera by a Black composer, though a production of Terence Blanchard’s “Fire Shut Up in My Bones” is planned for a future season….
That sounds dire. As you may recall, when Spike Lee’s career was briefly on an upward trajectory long ago in the 1980s, he employed his father, a veteran jazz musician, to score his movies. But then his widowed father remarried, to a white Jewish woman, breaking Spike’s heart. He fired his dad and hired the depressing Blanchard, and his movies have mostly been bad ever since.
At bottom, the entire music-education system rests upon the Schenkerian assumption that the Western tonality, with its major-minor harmony and its equal-tempered scale, is the master language. Vast tracts of the world’s music, from West African talking drums to Indonesian gamelan, fall outside that system, and African-American traditions have played in its interstices.
But of course Western classical music is the master language of music. For example, gamelan music, while cute, isn’t exactly Beethoven or Wagner. We have the judgment both of highly cultured East Asians and of the world’s movie fans, who expect film scores based on the 19th century Romantic tradition.
Basically, the Woke argument comes down to: Beethoven couldn’t have been all that: after all, he was white.
But he was.
Between now and Beethoven’s 250th birthday in December, we are going to be told countless times by the Wokely enlightened that Beethoven enjoyed White Privilege.
You might think that they would strategically decide that it doesn’t help their campaign to diss Beethoven. After all, Beethoven is Beethoven. The smart thing would be to not remind white people that Beethoven was white and they hate him for that. But they are so twisted by ressentiment that they just can’t help themselves.
* Here, via OperaBase, are most performed composers from 2004-2019 of classical vocal works (operas, operettas, oratorios, etc.):
Composer Performances Productions
Verdi 41863 8803
Mozart 34269 6396
Puccini 30802 6282
Rossini 13573 2911
Donizetti 11768 2592
Wagner,Richard 11747 2969
Bizet 9651 1858
Strauss,J 7901 1247
Strauss,R 6944 1438
Offenbach 6471 1114
Tchaikovsky,P 6253 1425
Lehár 5848 821
Handel 5839 1502
Humperdinck 4343 755
Kálmán,E 4226 695
Britten 4128 891
Various 3973 2471
Janáček 3301 670
Bellini 3168 754
Gounod 3090 656
Massenet 2796 583
Leoncavallo 2733 636
Mascagni 2323 580
Gluck 2303 470
Beethoven 2000 462
Dvořák,A 1962 353
Weill 1857 352
Monteverdi 1829 453
Weber 1824 296
Rimsky-Korsakov 1773 508
Purcell 1605 421
Smetana 1584 277
Poulenc 1377 351
Musorgsky 1367 349
Benatzky 1322 152
Prokofiev,S 1313 293
Sullivan,A 1301 239
Stravinsky 1287 301
Berlioz 1103 260
Shostakovich 1073 241
Berg 1037 200
Lortzing 1031 148
Bernstein 945 200
Giordano 917 190
Debussy 859 192
Haydn 850 248
Glass 825 163
Orff 794 206
Ravel 773 166
Menotti 772 203
Zeller,C 770 89
Abraham 748 97
Rameau 716 187
Künneke 682 77
Gershwin 680 114
Millöcker 645 77
Bartók 642 174
Moniuszko 616 154
Saint-Saëns 576 138
Korngold 570 98
Borodin 558 163
Vivaldi 523 164
Nicolai 514 81
Martinů 496 100
Cavalli 487 113
Bach,JS 474 149
It’s a steep pyramid with tough competition: e.g. Bach is barely 1% as popular as Verdi. Two of the top opera composers died young: Mozart at 35, but also Bizet (Carmen) at 36. Here’s a speculative essay on what Mozart would have composed if he’d lived out his three score and ten, such as around 1810 an opera of Faust with a libretto by Goethe himself.
[Comment at Unz.com]


vdare--2020-09-19--RBG: Ruth Based Ginsburg

RBG: Ruth Based Ginsburg

Above , Justice Ginsburg on a 1984 trip to India with fellow Justice and personal friend Antonin Scalia The late @ @ @ @ @ liberal who believed in meritocracy ( she hired only one black clerk in four decades @ @ @ @ @ patriotism , opera , and the eugenic advantages of abortion .
The Fandom Around R.B.G @ @ @ @ @ With Reality By Amanda Hess Aug. 12 , 2020 , 5:00 a.m .
ET Now @ @ @ @ @ been met by a true activist movement with the sustained protests of Black Lives Matter @ @ @ @ @ like relics .
In 2016 , Ginsburg was asked about Colin Kaepernick ’ s kneeling @ @ @ @ @ and she called it “ disrespectful ” and “ really dumb .
”

Above, Justice Ginsburg on a 1984 trip to India with fellow Justice and personal friend Antonin Scalia
Earlier: Ruth Bader Ginsburg Fandom Represents White Privilege
The late Justice was basically an old-fashioned liberal who believed in meritocracy (she hired only one black clerk in four decades on the bench), patriotism, opera, and the eugenic advantages of abortion.
From the NYT criticism section:
The Fandom Around R.B.G. Is Out of Step With Reality
By Amanda Hess
Aug. 12, 2020, 5:00 a.m. ET
Now that the Trump era has been met by a true activist movement with the sustained protests of Black Lives Matter, the Ginsburg memes hit like relics. In 2016, Ginsburg was asked about Colin Kaepernick’s kneeling during the national anthem, and she called it “disrespectful” and “really dumb.”


vdare--2020-09-20--Ruth Bader Ginsburg vs. Frank Ricci

Ruth Bader Ginsburg vs. Frank Ricci

Ruth Bader Ginsburg was frequently interviewed by admiring journalists , but , apparently , nobody ever asked her to reconcile her strongly stated views on hiring diversity and affirmative action for other employers with her own hiring record of only hiring one black law clerk in 40 years as a judge ( approximately 1 black out of 119 clerks hired while on the Supreme Court ; during her 13 prior years on the prestigious D.C .
Circuit Court of Appeals , she hired zero blacks out of 57 individuals ( clerks , secretaries , etc . )
she personally hired @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ginsburg hired black applicants well under 1 % of the time .
In 2009 the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of fireman Frank Ricci and 19 other white and Hispanic firemen in New Haven , CN who had earned promotions on a civil service promotion test that had been carefully and intentionally designed to be fair to blacks , with black firemen in New Haven being given much input into what should be on the test .
But when no blacks scored high enough to earn promotion on the test in 2003 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the behest of his black powerbroker , ordered the test results torn up .
Obviously , this was an example of racial discrimination by a government official , made especially flagrant by its post hoc nature .
The majority of the Supreme Court saw “ equal protection of the laws ” as applying to white ( and Hispanic ) victims of racial discrimination , not just to black victims .
On the other hand , Ruth Bader Ginsburg ’ s minority saw it differently .
From Justice Ginsburg ’ s losing dissent in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case : SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FRANK RICCI , et al.
, PETITIONERS [ June 29 , 2009 ] Justice Ginsburg , with whom Justice Stevens , Justice Souter , and Justice Breyer join , dissenting .
In assessing claims of race discrimination , “ [ c ] ontext matters.
” Grutter v. Bollinger , 539 U. S. 306 , 327 ( 2003 ) .
In 1972 , Congress extended Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to cover public employment .
At that time , municipal fire departments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s , pervasively discriminated against minorities .
The extension of Title VII to cover jobs in firefighting effected no overnight change .
It took decades of persistent effort , advanced by Title VII litigation , to open firefighting posts to members of racial minorities .
The white firefighters who scored high on New Haven ’ s promotional exams understandably attract this Court ’ s sympathy .
But they had no vested right to promotion .
Nor have other persons received promotions in preference to them .
New Haven maintains that it refused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believed , for good cause , that it would be vulnerable to a Title VII disparate-impact suit if it relied on those results .
The Court today holds that New Haven has not demonstrated “ a strong basis in evidence ” for its plea .
Ante , at 2 .
In so holding , the Court pretends that “ [ t ] he City rejected the test results solely because the higher scoring candidates were white.
” Ante , at 20 .
That pretension , essential to the Court ’ s disposition , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the tests New Haven used .
The Court similarly fails to acknowledge the better tests used in other cities , which have yielded less racially skewed outcomes.1 As we all know , it ’ s extremely rare for whites to outscore blacks on valid tests , so therefore any test in which whites do better than blacks on average is automatically suspect .
Seriously … the only “ tests ” of firefighting ability in which the racial gap is not large are ones in which the graders are allowed to look at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ones high scores for imponderables ( i.e.
, for being black ) .
But , much to the disapproval of Justice Ginsburg , only 40 % of the New Haven test was oral , while 60 % was written ( and thus harder to rig in favor of black candidates ) .
In other words , the Coalition of the Fringes will bury you doomed Core Americans .
OK , but this is now 2009 and not 1971 .
An enormous effort was made after 1971 to make sure that merit-based employment principles @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see that the antiquarianism that makes up so much of the rationalization for anti-white hatred during the Great Awokening ( e.g.
, Emmett Till , Redlining , Tulsa in 1921 ) was already active in Justice Ginsburg ’ s mind in 2009 , while the events of more recent decades were getting foggy .
118 Cong .
Rec .
1817 ( 1972 ) .
Such flawed selection methods served to entrench preexisting racial hierarchies .
The USCCR report singled out police and fire departments for having “ [ b ] arriers to equal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other area of State or local government , ” with African-Americans “ hold [ ing ] almost no positions in the officer ranks.
” Ibid .
See also National Commission on Fire Prevention and Control , America Burning 5 ( 1973 ) ( “ Racial minorities are under-represented in the fire departments in nearly every community in which they live.
” ) .
The city of New Haven ( City ) was no exception .
In the early 1970 ’ s , African-Americans and Hispanics composed 30 percent of New Haven ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the City ’ s 502 firefighters .
The racial disparity in the officer ranks was even more pronounced : “ [ O ] f the 107 officers in the Department only one was black , and he held the lowest rank above private.
” Firebird Soc .
of New Haven , Inc. v. New Haven Bd .
of Fire Comm ’ rs , 66 F. R. D. 457 , 460 ( Conn. 1975 ) .
Following a lawsuit and settlement agreement , see ibid.
, the City initiated efforts to increase minority representation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Department ) .
Those litigation-induced efforts produced some positive change .
New Haven ’ s population includes a greater proportion of minorities today than it did in the 1970 ’ s : Nearly 40 percent of the City ’ s residents are African-American and more than 20 percent are Hispanic .
Among entry-level firefighters , minorities are still underrepresented , but not starkly so .
As of 2003 , African-Americans and Hispanics constituted 30 percent and 16 percent of the City ’ s firefighters , respectively .
In supervisory positions , however , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ senior officer ranks ( captain and higher ) are nine percent African-American and nine percent Hispanic .
Only one of the Department ’ s 21 fire captains is African-American .
See App .
in No .
06–4996–cv ( CA2 ) , p. A1588 ( hereinafter CA2 App. )
.
It is against this backdrop of entrenched inequality that the promotion process at issue in this litigation should be assessed .
… Pursuant to New Haven ’ s specifications , IOS developed and administered the oral and written exams .
The results showed significant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the pass rate for African-American candidates was about one-half the rate for Caucasian candidates ; the pass rate for Hispanic candidates was even lower .
On the captain exam , both African-American and Hispanic candidates passed at about half the rate of their Caucasian counterparts .
See App .
225–226 .
More striking still , although nearly half of the 77 lieutenant candidates were African-American or Hispanic , none would have been eligible for promotion to the eight positions then vacant .
The highest scoring African-American candidate ranked 13th ; the top @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the seven then-vacant captain positions , two Hispanic candidates would have been eligible , but no African-Americans .
The highest scoring African-American candidate ranked 15th .
See id.
, at 218–219 .
These stark disparities , the Court acknowledges , sufficed to state a prima facie case under Title VII ’ s disparate-impact provision .
See ante , at 27 ( “ The pass rates of minorities .
.
.
f [ e ] ll well below the 80-percent standard set by the [ Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( EEOC ) ] to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” ) .
Strikingly , there are stronger principled arguments for why Justice Ginsburg should have been cited for hiring discrimination than in the Ricci case .
Firemen chiefly battle an objective , non-political problem : fire .
The job is not fundamentally political .
In contrast , the police are more political ( as the etymology of the word “ police ” would suggest ) .
Thus , it ’ s not unreasonable to make sure you have more black cops than could be justified by their objective performance .
Even more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , by all accounts , have significant influence over their bosses , who are among the most politically powerful people in the country .
Hilariously , in only one of Justice Ginsburg ’ s 40 years as a judge did she ever have input from a black among her four clerks .

Ruth Bader Ginsburg was frequently interviewed by admiring journalists, but, apparently, nobody ever asked her to reconcile her strongly stated views on hiring diversity and affirmative action for other employers with her own hiring record of only hiring one black law clerk in 40 years as a judge (approximately 1 black out of 119 clerks hired while on the Supreme Court; during her 13 prior years on the prestigious D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, she hired zero blacks out of 57 individuals (clerks, secretaries, etc.) she personally hired. So, from 1980–2020, Justice Ginsburg hired black applicants well under 1% of the time.
In 2009 the Supreme Court ruled 5–4 in favor of fireman Frank Ricci and 19 other white and Hispanic firemen in New Haven, CT who had earned promotions on a civil service promotion test that had been carefully and intentionally designed to be fair to blacks, with black firemen in New Haven being given much input into what should be on the test.
But when no blacks scored high enough to earn promotion on the test in 2003, the white Democratic mayor, at the behest of his black powerbroker, ordered the test results torn up.
Obviously, this was an example of racial discrimination by a government official, made especially flagrant by its post hoc nature. The majority of the Supreme Court saw “equal protection of the laws” as applying to white (and Hispanic) victims of racial discrimination, not just to black victims.
On the other hand, Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s minority saw it differently.
From Justice Ginsburg’s losing dissent in the 2009 Ricci vs. DiStefano affirmative action case:
Ginsburg, J., dissenting SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FRANK RICCI, et al., PETITIONERS 07–1428 v. JOHN DeSTEFANO et al. [June 29, 2009]
Justice Ginsburg, with whom Justice Stevens, Justice Souter, and Justice Breyer join, dissenting. In assessing claims of race discrimination, “[c]ontext matters.” Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U. S. 306, 327 (2003) . In 1972, Congress extended Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to cover public employment. At that time, municipal fire departments across the country, including New Haven’s, pervasively discriminated against minorities. The extension of Title VII to cover jobs in firefighting effected no overnight change. It took decades of persistent effort, advanced by Title VII litigation, to open firefighting posts to members of racial minorities. The white firefighters who scored high on New Haven’s promotional exams understandably attract this Court’s sympathy. But they had no vested right to promotion. Nor have other persons received promotions in preference to them. New Haven maintains that it refused to certify the test results because it believed, for good cause, that it would be vulnerable to a Title VII disparate-impact suit if it relied on those results. The Court today holds that New Haven has not demonstrated “a strong basis in evidence” for its plea. Ante, at 2. In so holding, the Court pretends that “[t]he City rejected the test results solely because the higher scoring candidates were white.” Ante, at 20. That pretension, essential to the Court’s disposition, ignores substantial evidence of multiple flaws in the tests New Haven used. The Court similarly fails to acknowledge the better tests used in other cities, which have yielded less racially skewed outcomes.1
As we all know, it’s extremely rare for whites to outscore blacks on valid tests, so therefore any test in which whites do better than blacks on average is automatically suspect.
Seriously … the only “tests” of firefighting ability in which the racial gap is not large are ones in which the graders are allowed to look at the test takers and then give the black ones high scores for imponderables (i.e., for being black). But, much to the disapproval of Justice Ginsburg, only 40% of the New Haven test was oral, while 60% was written (and thus harder to rig in favor of black candidates).
By order of this Court, New Haven, a city in which African-Americans and Hispanics account for nearly 60 percent of the population, must today be served—as it was in the days of undisguised discrimination—by a fire department in which members of racial and ethnic minorities are rarely seen in command positions. In arriving at its order, the Court barely acknowledges the pathmarking decision in Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U. S. 424 (1971) , which explained the centrality of the disparate-impact concept to effective enforcement of Title VII. The Court’s order and opinion, I anticipate, will not have staying power.
In other words, the Coalition of the Fringes will bury you doomed Core Americans.
The Court’s recitation of the facts leaves out important parts of the story. Firefighting is a profession in which the legacy of racial discrimination casts an especially long shadow. In extending Title VII to state and local government employers in 1972, Congress took note of a U. S. Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR) report finding racial discrimination in municipal employment even “more pervasive than in the private sector.” H. R. Rep. No. 92–238, p. 17 (1971). According to the report, overt racism was partly to blame, but so too was a failure on the part of municipal employers to apply merit-based employment principles. In making hiring and promotion decisions, public employers often “rel[ied] on criteria unrelated to job performance,” including nepotism or political patronage.
OK, but this is now 2009 and not 1971. An enormous effort was made after 1971 to make sure that merit-based employment principles were applied to blacks.
You can see that the antiquarianism that makes up so much of the rationalization for anti-white hatred during the Great Awokening (e.g., Emmett Till, Redlining, Tulsa in 1921) was already active in Justice Ginsburg’s mind in 2009, while the events of more recent decades were getting foggy.
118 Cong. Rec. 1817 (1972). Such flawed selection methods served to entrench preexisting racial hierarchies. The USCCR report singled out police and fire departments for having “[b]arriers to equal employment … greater … than in any other area of State or local government,” with African-Americans “hold[ing] almost no positions in the officer ranks.” Ibid. See also National Commission on Fire Prevention and Control, America Burning 5 (1973) (“Racial minorities are under-represented in the fire departments in nearly every community in which they live.”). The city of New Haven (City) was no exception. In the early 1970’s, African-Americans and Hispanics composed 30 percent of New Haven’s population, but only 3.6 percent of the City’s 502 firefighters. The racial disparity in the officer ranks was even more pronounced: “[O]f the 107 officers in the Department only one was black, and he held the lowest rank above private.” Firebird Soc. of New Haven, Inc. v. New Haven Bd. of Fire Comm’rs, 66 F. R. D. 457, 460 (Conn. 1975). Following a lawsuit and settlement agreement, see ibid., the City initiated efforts to increase minority representation in the New Haven Fire Department (Department). Those litigation-induced efforts produced some positive change. New Haven’s population includes a greater proportion of minorities today than it did in the 1970’s: Nearly 40 percent of the City’s residents are African-American and more than 20 percent are Hispanic. Among entry-level firefighters, minorities are still underrepresented, but not starkly so. As of 2003, African-Americans and Hispanics constituted 30 percent and 16 percent of the City’s firefighters, respectively. In supervisory positions, however, significant disparities remain. Overall, the senior officer ranks (captain and higher) are nine percent African-American and nine percent Hispanic. Only one of the Department’s 21 fire captains is African-American. See App. in No. 06–4996–cv (CA2), p. A1588 (hereinafter CA2 App.). It is against this backdrop of entrenched inequality that the promotion process at issue in this litigation should be assessed. … Pursuant to New Haven’s specifications, IOS developed and administered the oral and written exams. The results showed significant racial disparities. On the lieutenant exam, the pass rate for African-American candidates was about one-half the rate for Caucasian candidates; the pass rate for Hispanic candidates was even lower. On the captain exam, both African-American and Hispanic candidates passed at about half the rate of their Caucasian counterparts. See App. 225–226. More striking still, although nearly half of the 77 lieutenant candidates were African-American or Hispanic, none would have been eligible for promotion to the eight positions then vacant. The highest scoring African-American candidate ranked 13th; the top Hispanic candidate was 26th. As for the seven then-vacant captain positions, two Hispanic candidates would have been eligible, but no African-Americans. The highest scoring African-American candidate ranked 15th. See id., at 218–219. These stark disparities, the Court acknowledges, sufficed to state a prima facie case under Title VII’s disparate-impact provision. See ante, at 27 (“The pass rates of minorities . . . f[e]ll well below the 80-percent standard set by the [Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)] to implement the disparate-impact provision of Title VII.”).
Strikingly, there are stronger principled arguments for why Justice Ginsburg should have been cited for hiring discrimination than in the Ricci case. Firemen chiefly battle an objective, non-political problem: fire. The job is not fundamentally political. In contrast, the police are more political (as the etymology of the word “police” would suggest). Thus, it’s not unreasonable to make sure you have more black cops than could be justified by their objective performance.
Even more political are Supreme Court clerks, who, by all accounts, have significant influence over their bosses, who are among the most politically powerful people in the country.
Hilariously, in only one of Justice Ginsburg’s 40 years as a judge did she ever have input from a black among her four clerks.
[Comment at Unz.com]


vdare--2020-09-20--Where Do Trump’s Possible SCOTUS Picks Stand On Immigration?

Previously : The DACA Disgrace : Judicial Nominees Must Now Face An Immigration Litmus Test Ruth Bader Ginsburg ’ s death puts President Trump in both a powerful and a tricky position .
We are just a few weeks away from the November election and whoever Trump selects as his nominee could decide the winner .
This is one of the most important decisions of Trump ’ s presidency , if not the most important .
It is vital he selects someone who can be counted on to uphold solid immigration principles and not side with the open borders lobby @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strike down birthright citizenship , defend the executive branch ’ s aggressive enforcement of immigration law , side with American workers over the cheap labor lobby , stand firm against the dubious complaints of non-citizens , and understand the constitutionality of travel bans .
The most likely candidates and where they stand on immigration ( as far as we can tell ) : Amy Coney Barrett is a Trump-appointed federal judge .
She is the favorite among social conservatives and was on Trump ’ s shortlist when he picked Brett Kavanaugh for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most likely candidate if Trump decides to nominate a woman .
Her record on immigration is fairly good .
In a dissent , she defended the president ’ s public charge rule , which denies permanent residency to immigrants who rely on government assistance .
However , there are questions .
Barrett , as Ann Coulter points out on Twitter , has said she has to recuse herself from cases where her Catholic faith precludes from a proper judgement .
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops ’ notorious embrace of Open Borders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immigration policies .
[ Amy Coney Barrett Is Not a Safe Pick for the Supreme Court .
Her writings on faith and jurisprudence should worry conservatives , by John Zmirak , Human Events , September 19 , 2019 ] .
She also has two adopted black children from Haiti , which may influence her decisions as well .
BREAKING : Coney Barrett is reportedly the front-runner .
Ho is another Trump-appointed federal judge .
He was recently added to the president ’ s judicial list and is a favorite among establishment White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Taiwan .
But Ho is a non-starter with immigration patriots .
He is a firm advocate of birthright citizenship and vociferously opposes any changes to this horrible standard [ Disloyal Elements in Trump Administration Plan to Sneak Birthright Citizenship Activist onto Supreme Court , Revolver News , September 17 , 2020 ] .
That ’ s enough to disqualify him .
The Arkansas Senator [ NumbersUSA Rating A+ ] is arguably the best in the upper chamber on domestic issues .
He is a committed immigration patriot who backs reducing immigration , punishing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He , unlike other senators , appears open to a SCOTUS nomination [ Tom Cotton after Trump names him potential Supreme Court nominee : 'It 's time for Roe v. Wade to go ' , by Rebecca Klar , The Hill , September 9 , 2020 ] .
This Harvard Law graduate would make an excellent addition to the Supreme Court .
The Texas senator [ NumbersUSA Rating A+ ] would make another fine pick to the Court .
Ever since 2016 , he ’ s been solid on immigration and in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ [ Ted Cruz supports end to birthright citizenship , but sees 'open question ' if Trump has that power , by James Barragán and Todd J. Gillman , Dallas Morning News , October 30 , 2018 ] .
Cruz also backed the president ’ s expanded ant-unemployment immigration moratorium .
While not exactly known for his resolute commitment to political positions , he would be a reliable strict constructionist on the court who would not be biased against immigration patriotism .
But Cruz probably still harbors Presidential ambitions and has publicly said he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says he does not want SCOTUS job , by Alison Main and Caroline Kelly , CNN , September 16 , 2020 ] .
The Missouri Senator [ NumbersUSA Rating A+ ] is another solid immigration patriot .
He sponsored the RAISE Act to reduce immigration and backed Trump ’ s immigration moratorium .
But he is iffy on birthright citizenship and is not as good as Cotton [ Hawley noncommittal on Trump ’ s call to end birthright citizenship , Associated Press , October 31 , 2018 ] .
And like Cruz , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the job .
The Utah senator is the worst of the Senator options on Trump ’ s list but not the worst of the entire list .
He ’ s decent on immigration and boasts an A NumbersUSA rating .
However , he is the lead Senate champion of the horrible “ Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act ” and his libertarianism could lead him to oppose stringent enforcement of immigration laws .
He would probably be better than the disappointing Neil Gorsuch , but there are better options .
Lagoa is a Trump-appointed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actually Cuban ) woman to serve on the Florida Supreme Court .
She is considered one of the early favorites based on her being a woman and a minority [ What you need to know about Barbara Lagoa , by Evan Semones , Politico , September 19 , 2020 ] .
Those are not particularly good signs .
Her immigration record is scant but her status as a leader in the Cuban community is a concern—there are cases of Cubans going either way on immigration .
She may well rule for lax immigration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the majority of Democratic senators voted for her confirmation—a good indication she is not a strong conservative .
( Her father-in-law is Paul Huck , a Clinton-appointed federal judge ) .
Lagoa ’ s pick would also be a win for minority identity politics and undermine Trump ’ s implicit promise to defend white America .
Rushing is a 38-year-old , Trump-appointed federal judge .
She is the best among the possible female candidates .
She ruled in two important cases on the side of immigration patriotism .
In Perez v. Cuccinelli @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and ruled the government could deport an illegal who claimed a dubious right to stay in America .
In Bah v. Barr , she ruled in favor of the deportation of an immigrant who was convicted of drug possession .
These two cases highlight her commitment to vigorous immigration enforcement and her young age shows she would hold the seat for generations .
In my opinion , there ’ s no better woman to pick .
Clement served as solicitor general under George W. Bush and is a favorite with the GOP Establishment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immigration patriot credentials .
At a time when few top-notch lawyers are willing to put their name and reputation in defense of sensible immigration laws , he defended Arizona ’ s SB 1070 immigration law before the Supreme Court .
This shows he will ignore liberal elite opinions , while his establishment credentials make him a safe choice for Trump .
He would be a great pick .
Thapar is the child of Indian immigrants and a Trump-appointed federal judge .
He is a close ally of Mitch McConnell and was on Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SCOTUS picks .
Thapar ’ s immigration record is surprisingly decent .
In most of the cases that have come before him , he has ruled in favor of the government against non-citizens , including ruling against an immigrant ’ s dubious asylum claims .
But his selection would be a boost to minority identity politics and it ’ s always risky to select someone from an immigrant background because of their emotional propensity to side with immigrants than native Americans .
Kethledge is a federal judge who was nearly picked to replace @ @ @ @ @ @ @ atrocious on immigration .
He consistently ruled in favor of immigrants—both legal and illegal—against the government and shielded them from deportation .
He even defended an illegal alien ’ s lying in federal court [ SCOTUS Frontrunner Raymond Kethledge ’ s Record Reveals Immigration Weakness , Breitbart , July 6 , 2018 ] .
Hardiman is a federal judge who was on Trump ’ s shortlist in both of his past SCOTUS decisions .
He is awful on immigration .
Like Kethledge , he has a long-record of siding with immigrants against government-ordered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did pro bono work for illegal aliens in the early 2000s .
He would be a terrible pick .
Pryor is a federal judge who was on Trump ’ s shortlist when he selected Antonin Scalia ’ s replacement in 2017 .
His immigration record leaves much to be desired .
He allowed an HIV-positive gay immigrant to stay in the U.S. over one claim a police officer assaulted him in his home country .
He also ruled in favor of other immigrants fighting deportation orders .
He is a close ally of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the shortlist in 2017 .
That association likely excludes him from consideration in 2020 .
He ’ s better than others but not that great .
Todd is a White House deputy counsel .
She previously worked as a senior lawyer for the US Chamber of Commerce .
Independent journalist Ryan Girdusky and American Greatness editor Pedro Gonzalez both warn that she is a leading contender and horrible on immigration .
Both men are fine immigration patriots and Todd ’ s past work with the Chamber of Commerce should also raise red flags @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Many patriots already have their favorite picks .
Ryan Girdusky says it should be Allison Rushing .
Ann Coulter says it should be her friend Miguel Estrada , a former Bush judicial nominee who is not on Trump ’ s SCOTUS list .
My take : The three best picks of the ones listed above are Cotton , Rushing , and Clement .
If Trump wants a senator , Cotton is the best pick .
If he wants a woman , Rushing should be the choice .
If he wants a reputable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ best option .
The worst choices : Lagoa , Kethledge , and Hardiman .
It appears only Lagoa is a serious contender among those three .
The New York Times reports the top three contenders are Barrett , Lagoa , and Thapar .
None of those choices are ideal , but Barrett would likely be the least worst among them .
Trump only has one shot to get this right .
Neil Gorsuch turned out to be a disappointment , as VDARE.com John Reid feared ( see here and here ) .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kavanaugh .
Trump ’ s election depends on making a great choice—he must select an immigration patriot or face certain defeat in November .

washingtonwatcherii@protonmail.com (Washington  Watcher II)

Previously: The DACA Disgrace: Judicial Nominees Must Now Face An Immigration Litmus Test
Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death puts President Trump in both a powerful and a tricky position. We are just a few weeks away from the November election and whoever Trump selects as his nominee could decide the winner. This is one of the most important decisions of Trump’s presidency, if not the most important. It is vital he selects someone who can be counted on to uphold solid immigration principles and not side with the open borders lobby. We need a justice who will strike down birthright citizenship, defend the executive branch’s aggressive enforcement of immigration law, side with American workers over the cheap labor lobby, stand firm against the dubious complaints of non-citizens, and understand the constitutionality of travel bans.
The most likely candidates and where they stand on immigration (as far as we can tell):
Amy Coney Barrett
Amy Coney Barrett is a Trump-appointed federal judge. She is the favorite among social conservatives and was on Trump’s shortlist when he picked Brett Kavanaugh for the court in 2018. She’s the most likely candidate if Trump decides to nominate a woman.
Her record on immigration is fairly good. In a dissent, she defended the president’s public charge rule, which denies permanent residency to immigrants who rely on government assistance.
However, there are questions. Barrett, as Ann Coulter points out on Twitter, has said she has to recuse herself from cases where her Catholic faith precludes from a proper judgement. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ notorious embrace of Open Borders may influence her to vote for liberal immigration policies. [Amy Coney Barrett Is Not a Safe Pick for the Supreme Court. Her writings on faith and jurisprudence should worry conservatives, by John Zmirak, Human Events, September 19, 2019]. She also has two adopted black children from Haiti, which may influence her decisions as well. BREAKING: Coney Barrett is reportedly the front-runner.
If so, he will lose. https://t.co/eMLgF7osAz — Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) September 19, 2020
James Ho
Ho is another Trump-appointed federal judge. He was recently added to the president’s judicial list and is a favorite among establishment White House staffers. He is an immigrant from Taiwan.
But Ho is a non-starter with immigration patriots. He is a firm advocate of birthright citizenship and vociferously opposes any changes to this horrible standard [Disloyal Elements in Trump Administration Plan to Sneak Birthright Citizenship Activist onto Supreme Court, Revolver News, September 17, 2020]. That’s enough to disqualify him.
Senator Tom Cotton
The Arkansas Senator [NumbersUSA Rating A+] is arguably the best in the upper chamber on domestic issues. He is a committed immigration patriot who backs reducing immigration, punishing sanctuary cities, and firmly opposes amnesty. He, unlike other senators, appears open to a SCOTUS nomination [Tom Cotton after Trump names him potential Supreme Court nominee: 'It's time for Roe v. Wade to go,' by Rebecca Klar, The Hill, September 9, 2020]. This Harvard Law graduate would make an excellent addition to the Supreme Court.
Senator Ted Cruz
The Texas senator [NumbersUSA Rating A+] would make another fine pick to the Court. Ever since 2016, he’s been solid on immigration and in principle supports the elimination of birthright citizenship [Ted Cruz supports end to birthright citizenship, but sees 'open question' if Trump has that power, by James Barragán and Todd J. Gillman, Dallas Morning News, October 30, 2018]. Cruz also backed the president’s expanded anti-unemployment immigration moratorium.
While not exactly known for his resolute commitment to political positions, he would be a reliable strict constructionist on the court who would not be biased against immigration patriotism. But Cruz probably still harbors presidential ambitions and has publicly said he does not want the nomination [Cruz says he does not want SCOTUS job, by Alison Main and Caroline Kelly, CNN, September 16, 2020].
Senator Josh Hawley
The Missouri Senator [NumbersUSA Rating A+] is another solid immigration patriot. He sponsored the RAISE Act to reduce immigration and backed Trump’s immigration moratorium. But he is iffy on birthright citizenship and is not as good as Cotton [Hawley noncommittal on Trump’s call to end birthright citizenship, Associated Press, October 31, 2018]. And like Cruz, he has said he does not want the job.
Senator Mike Lee
The Utah senator is the worst of the Senator options on Trump’s list but not the worst of the entire list. He’s decent on immigration and boasts an A NumbersUSA rating. However, he is the lead Senate champion of the horrible “Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act” and his libertarianism could lead him to oppose stringent enforcement of immigration laws. He would probably be better than the disappointing Neil Gorsuch, but there are better options.
Barbara Lagoa
Lagoa is a Trump-appointed federal judge and the first Hispanic (actually Cuban) woman to serve on the Florida Supreme Court. She is considered one of the early favorites based on her being a woman and a minority [What you need to know about Barbara Lagoa, by Evan Semones, Politico, September 19, 2020].
Those are not particularly good signs. Her immigration record is scant but her status as a leader in the Cuban community is a concern—there are cases of Cubans going either way on immigration. She may well rule for lax immigration policies if it benefits Cubans. Interestingly, the majority of Democratic senators voted for her confirmation—a good indication she is not a strong conservative. (Her father-in-law is Paul Huck, a Clinton-appointed federal judge).
Lagoa’s pick would also be a win for minority identity politics and undermine Trump’s implicit promise to defend white America.
Allison Rushing
Rushing is a 38-year-old, Trump-appointed federal judge. She is the best among the possible female candidates. She ruled in two important cases on the side of immigration patriotism. In Perez v. Cuccinelli, she dissented from the majority opinion and ruled the government could deport an illegal who claimed a dubious right to stay in America. In Bah v. Barr, she ruled in favor of the deportation of an immigrant who was convicted of drug possession. These two cases highlight her commitment to vigorous immigration enforcement and her young age shows she would hold the seat for generations. In my opinion, there’s no better woman to pick.
Paul Clement
Clement served as solicitor general under George W. Bush and is a favorite with the GOP Establishment. Despite that, he has impeccable immigration patriot credentials. At a time when few top-notch lawyers are willing to put their name and reputation in defense of sensible immigration laws, he defended Arizona’s SB 1070 immigration law before the Supreme Court. This shows he will ignore liberal elite opinions, while his establishment credentials make him a safe choice for Trump. He would be a great pick.
Amul Thapar
Thapar is the child of Indian immigrants and a Trump-appointed federal judge. He is a close ally of Mitch McConnell and was on Trump’s shortlist for his two past SCOTUS picks. Thapar’s immigration record is surprisingly decent. In most of the cases that have come before him, he has ruled in favor of the government against non-citizens, including ruling against an immigrant’s dubious asylum claims.
But his selection would be a boost to minority identity politics and it’s always risky to select someone from an immigrant background because of their emotional propensity to side with immigrants rather than native Americans.
Raymond Kethledge
Kethledge is a federal judge who was nearly picked to replace Anthony Kennedy in 2018. He is atrocious on immigration. He consistently ruled in favor of immigrants—both legal and illegal—against the government and shielded them from deportation. He even defended an illegal alien’s lying in federal court [SCOTUS Frontrunner Raymond Kethledge’s Record Reveals Immigration Weakness, Breitbart, July 6, 2018].
Thomas Hardiman
Hardiman is a federal judge who was on Trump’s shortlist in both of his past SCOTUS decisions. He is awful on immigration. Like Kethledge, he has a long-record of siding with immigrants against government-ordered deportations. Worst of all, he did pro bono work for illegal aliens in the early 2000s. He would be a terrible pick.
William Pryor
Pryor is a federal judge who was on Trump’s shortlist when he selected Antonin Scalia’s replacement in 2017. His immigration record leaves much to be desired. He allowed an HIV-positive gay immigrant to stay in the U.S. over one claim a police officer assaulted him in his home country. He also ruled in favor of other immigrants fighting deportation orders. He is a close ally of Jeff Sessions, which got him on the shortlist in 2017. That association likely excludes him from consideration in 2020. He’s better than others but not that great.
Kate Todd
Todd is a White House deputy counsel. She previously worked as a senior lawyer for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Independent journalist Ryan Girdusky and American Greatness editor Pedro Gonzalez both warn that she is a leading contender and horrible on immigration.
Can't load tweet https://twitter.com/RyanGirdusky/status/1307410784402706436: Sorry, that page does not exist
Keep an eye out for Kate Todd. She's supposed to be a frontrunner. She can be summarized as a Chamber of Commerce lawyer, and therefore the female version of James Ho on immigration. Husband is NeverTrumper/Bushite Gordon Todd. — Pedro L. Gonzalez (@emeriticus) September 19, 2020
Both men are fine immigration patriots and Todd’s past work with the Chamber of Commerce should also raise red flags. She would be a terrible pick.
Many patriots already have their favorite picks. Ryan Girdusky says it should be Allison Rushing. Ann Coulter says it should be her friend Miguel Estrada, a former Bush judicial nominee who is not on Trump’s SCOTUS list.
My take: the three best picks of the ones listed above are Cotton, Rushing, and Clement. If Trump wants a senator, Cotton is the best pick. If he wants a woman, Rushing should be the choice. If he wants a reputable “moderate,” Clement is his best option.
The worst choices: Lagoa, Kethledge, and Hardiman. It appears only Lagoa is a serious contender among those three.
The New York Times reports the top three contenders are Barrett, Lagoa, and Thapar. None of those choices are ideal, but Barrett would likely be the least worst among them.
Trump only has one shot to get this right. Neil Gorsuch turned out to be a disappointment, as VDARE.com's John Reid feared (see here and here). But Trump made the right call with Brett Kavanaugh.
Trump’s election depends on making a great choice—he must select an immigration patriot or face certain defeat in November.


vdare--2020-09-21--The Biggest Conspiracy Theory: 33% Blame Riots On Right-Wing Outside Agitators

Earlier : Tale Of Two Conspiracy Theories : QAnon Is Harmless , “ White Privilege ” Provokes Riots .
Guess @ @ @ @ @ ?
The prestige press is in a tizzy over the Qanon menace , but never @ @ @ @ @ conspiracy theory : that the George Floyd Memorial Riots are due to right-wing Outside Agitators @ @ @ @ @ released on September 13 : Per the latest Fox poll , ( taken before the @ @ @ @ @ Deputies ) a plurality of voters now classify what 's been happening in Kenosha/Portland etc @ @ @ @ @ the far left for the violence .
People no longer buying the media 's lies @ @ @ @ @ Andrew Surabian ( @ Surabees ) September 13 , 2020 Wow , 33 % believe @ @ @ @ @ right wing radicals are more to blame for the George Floyd Memorial riots .
That @ @ @

Earlier: Tale Of Two Conspiracy Theories: QAnon Is Harmless, “White Privilege” Provokes Riots. Guess Which One GOP Leadership Denounces?
The prestige press is in a tizzy over the Qanon menace, but never mentions a far more widespread conspiracy theory: that the George Floyd Memorial Riots are due to right-wing Outside Agitators. From a Fox poll released on September 13:
Wow, 33% believe the crazy conspiracy theory that right wing radicals are more to blame for the George Floyd Memorial riots. That is dismaying.
[Comment at Unz.com]


vdare--2020-09-21--Border Apprehension Numbers: Still Below Obama Levels, But Uptick Worrisome

Earlier : Despite NEWSWEEK Hysteria , Border Apprehensions Still Way Below 2019 Numbers .
But They Are Creeping Up The most recent Border Apprehension numbers are now available , below .
While the uptick is worrisome , they 're still below Obama-era levels .
Drugs Not Diapers : With Migrant Numbers Down Border Patrol Able to Seize Illicit Narcotics The latest statistics on southern border apprehensions from CBP presents a mixed picture .
The bad news : Border Patrol apprehensions , which had cratered in April at 16,162 with the implementation of public-health restrictions on entry in response to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , reaching 38,347 by July .
The good news : The number of aliens apprehended entering illegally this year is still lower than last year , and the change in demographics of those apprehended has shifted from families and children to single adults , freeing Border Patrol to focus on its other primary missions : preventing drugs and those posing a danger to this country from entering communities within the United States .
In contrast to last month 's numbers , a year before , Border Patrol caught 71,978 migrants entering the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whom ( 23,881 ) were single adults .
The rest were either adults traveling with children ( family units or `` FMU '' ) , or unaccompanied alien children ( UAC ) .
The majority ( 42,543 or 59 percent ) were FMU .
These numbers were actually down from a years ' long high two months ' earlier : 132,856 apprehensions in May 2019 , of whom 63 percent were FMU , and just under 28 percent were single adults… Read the rest at the Washington Times .

Earlier: Despite NEWSWEEK Hysteria, Border Apprehensions Still Way Below 2019 Numbers. But They Are Creeping Up
The most recent Border Apprehension numbers are now available, below. While the uptick is worrisome, they're still below Obama-era levels.
Can't render, error
Here's some perspective, via CIS:
Drugs Not Diapers: With Migrant Numbers Down Border Patrol Able to Seize Illicit Narcotics
By Andrew R. Arthur on August 26, 2020
The latest statistics on southern border apprehensions from CBP presents a mixed picture. The bad news: Border Patrol apprehensions, which had cratered in April at 16,162 with the implementation of public-health restrictions on entry in response to the Covid-19 pandemic, are creeping up again, reaching 38,347 by July. The good news: The number of aliens apprehended entering illegally this year is still lower than last year, and the change in demographics of those apprehended has shifted from families and children to single adults, freeing Border Patrol to focus on its other primary missions: preventing drugs and those posing a danger to this country from entering communities within the United States.
In contrast to last month's numbers, a year before, Border Patrol caught 71,978 migrants entering the United States illegally, just 33 percent of whom (23,881) were single adults. The rest were either adults traveling with children (family units or "FMU"), or unaccompanied alien children (UAC). The majority (42,543 or 59 percent) were FMU. These numbers were actually down from a years' long high two months' earlier: 132,856 apprehensions in May 2019, of whom 63 percent were FMU, and just under 28 percent were single adults…
Read the rest at the Washington Times.


vdare--2020-09-21--Patrick J. Buchanan: Last Best Chance to Capture Supreme Court

President Donald Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell are on the cusp of making history .
With Trump having named two justices to the U.S. Supreme Court , Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh , they have an opening to elevate a third justice to fill the seat of Ruth Bader Ginsburg , thereby securing the constitutionalism of the court for a generation .
Trump and McConnell need only persuade 50 of the 53 Senate Republicans to vote to confirm the nominee Trump says he will send up at week 's end , following the days of mourning for Ginsburg @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska , have said that they will not vote to confirm a justice nominated this close to a presidential election .
Yet , if Trump appoints a qualified female jurist , as he has pledged to do , and she passes muster in the Judiciary Committee , would four GOP senators really collude with Chuck Schumer 's Democratic Caucus to kill that Republican nominee and risk having President Joe Biden fill the seat ?
A Senate vote to reject a Republican nominee , in which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would demoralize and divide the party on election eve and betray a cause for which some have fought for 50 years .
It is hard to conceive of a greater act of political treason .
Many Republican presidents made strides toward recapturing the court after the radical rampage of the Earl Warren era .
None achieved it .
Three of Richard Nixon 's four picks went south on Roe v. Wade , and Justice Harry Blackmun authored the abominable decision .
Gerald Ford 's lone nominee , Justice John Paul Stevens , went @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
While Ronald Reagan nominated Antonin Scalia , his other choices , Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony Kennedy , became `` swing votes . ''
George H. W. Bush picked David Souter and Clarence Thomas , with the latter 's constitutionalism canceled out by the former 's liberalism .
But today , the hour of Trump 's triumph may be at hand , and the stark panic on the left testifies to it .
Mobs are forming outside McConnell 's home in Kentucky .
Former Attorney General Eric Holder threatens that if Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic Senate will cancel out its victory by `` packing '' the courts .
Rep. Joe Kennedy III says that if McConnell prevails in 2020 , `` We pack the court in 2021 . ''
Radicals are threatening to take to the streets and burn the country down if a Trump nominee is elevated .
Let them try .
When FDR , after his landslide reelection , sought to pack the court by increasing the number of justices in 1937 , the result was a national recoil and a political rout that cost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican senators have to bite the bullet on this one and vote on whomever Trump nominates before this session of Congress ends .
And , in this battle , there is no room for conscientious objectors .
Even `` Never Trumpers '' and Republicans for Biden have to take a stand .
For if they play a role in killing Trump 's nominee , and Biden wins in November , they will have helped to turn the Supreme Court over to leftist Democrats who will fill both the Ginsburg seat and that of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hold the court for years .
Consider the issues that the new nominee will decide .
The cause of right to life .
Affirmative action .
Religious freedom .
Immigration .
Gun rights .
All could be lost if the opportunity to fill the Ginsburg seat is forfeited by Republican defectors .
The 50-year struggle to recapture the Supreme Court would be over .
Are there Republicans who would really walk away from this last , best chance to secure the court , simply because the process offends their sense of proper procedure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Murkowski , Collins and a few other Republicans .
But to vote down a qualified conservative nominee , on the eve of a presidential election , would amount to a crippling blow to their party and to their reputations within that party .
It is said there is not time enough to get the vote done responsibly .
Nonsense .
Gerald Ford 's choice of John Paul Stevens went through in 19 days .
Only 49 days lapsed between the nomination of Ginsburg and her confirmation .
Of the nominees to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brutalized worst in the last 50 years were all Republican appointees : Clement Haynsworth in 1970 , Robert Bork in 1987 , Clarence Thomas in 1991 and Brett Kavanaugh in 2018 .
No Democratic nominee has been savaged like these four federal court judges .
And for Biden to condone a relentless partisan attack on a qualified female judge would seem to be risking the women 's vote in 2020 .
Assume that Amy Coney Barrett , Catholic jurist and mother of seven , is nominated .
Would fellow Catholic Joe Biden demand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she might be a vote against Roe v. Wade , which Joe now enthusiastically champions ?
Patrick J. Buchanan needs no introduction to VDARE.COM readers ; his books State of Emergency : The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America , and Suicide of a Superpower : Will America Survive to 2025 ?
are available from Amazon.com .
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of “ The Greatest Comeback : How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority .
His latest book , published May , 2018 , is “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.
” See Peter Brimelow ’ s review : “ Wheel And Fight ” —Pat Buchanan ’ s Nixon Book Provides Road Map For Trump .

President Donald Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell are on the cusp of making history.
With Trump having named two justices to the U.S. Supreme Court, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, they have an opening to elevate a third justice to fill the seat of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, thereby securing the constitutionalism of the court for a generation.
Trump and McConnell need only persuade 50 of the 53 Senate Republicans to vote to confirm the nominee Trump says he will send up at week's end, following the days of mourning for Ginsburg.
Two Republican senators, however, Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, have said that they will not vote to confirm a justice nominated this close to a presidential election.
Yet, if Trump appoints a qualified female jurist, as he has pledged to do, and she passes muster in the Judiciary Committee, would four GOP senators really collude with Chuck Schumer's Democratic Caucus to kill that Republican nominee and risk having President Joe Biden fill the seat?
A Senate vote to reject a Republican nominee, in which Republican senators cast the decisive votes, would demoralize and divide the party on election eve and betray a cause for which some have fought for 50 years. It is hard to conceive of a greater act of political treason.
Many Republican presidents made strides toward recapturing the court after the radical rampage of the Earl Warren era. None achieved it. Three of Richard Nixon's four picks went south on Roe v. Wade, and Justice Harry Blackmun authored the abominable decision.
Gerald Ford's lone nominee, Justice John Paul Stevens, went left as soon as he went up. While Ronald Reagan nominated Antonin Scalia, his other choices, Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony Kennedy, became "swing votes." George H. W. Bush picked David Souter and Clarence Thomas, with the latter's constitutionalism canceled out by the former's liberalism.
But today, the hour of Trump's triumph may be at hand, and the stark panic on the left testifies to it.
Mobs are forming outside McConnell's home in Kentucky. Former Attorney General Eric Holder threatens that if Republicans confirm a justice this year, a Democratic Senate will cancel out its victory by "packing" the courts. Rep. Joe Kennedy III says that if McConnell prevails in 2020, "We pack the court in 2021." Radicals are threatening to take to the streets and burn the country down if a Trump nominee is elevated.
Let them try.
When FDR, after his landslide reelection, sought to pack the court by increasing the number of justices in 1937, the result was a national recoil and a political rout that cost him 72 House seats in 1938.
Republican senators have to bite the bullet on this one and vote on whomever Trump nominates before this session of Congress ends.
And, in this battle, there is no room for conscientious objectors.
Even "Never Trumpers" and Republicans for Biden have to take a stand. For if they play a role in killing Trump's nominee, and Biden wins in November, they will have helped to turn the Supreme Court over to leftist Democrats who will fill both the Ginsburg seat and that of Justice Stephen Breyer, 82, and hold the court for years.
Consider the issues that the new nominee will decide.
The cause of right to life. Affirmative action. Religious freedom. Immigration. Gun rights. All could be lost if the opportunity to fill the Ginsburg seat is forfeited by Republican defectors. The 50-year struggle to recapture the Supreme Court would be over.
Are there Republicans who would really walk away from this last, best chance to secure the court, simply because the process offends their sense of proper procedure?
This may be a hard vote for Murkowski, Collins and a few other Republicans. But to vote down a qualified conservative nominee, on the eve of a presidential election, would amount to a crippling blow to their party and to their reputations within that party.
It is said there is not time enough to get the vote done responsibly.
Nonsense. Gerald Ford's choice of John Paul Stevens went through in 19 days. Only 49 days lapsed between the nomination of Ginsburg and her confirmation.
Of the nominees to the Supreme Court, those who have been brutalized worst in the last 50 years were all Republican appointees: Clement Haynsworth in 1970, Robert Bork in 1987, Clarence Thomas in 1991 and Brett Kavanaugh in 2018.
No Democratic nominee has been savaged like these four federal court judges. And for Biden to condone a relentless partisan attack on a qualified female judge would seem to be risking the women's vote in 2020.
Assume that Amy Coney Barrett, Catholic jurist and mother of seven, is nominated. Would fellow Catholic Joe Biden demand that his Democratic colleagues reject Barrett because she might be a vote against Roe v. Wade, which Joe now enthusiastically champions?
COPYRIGHT 2020 CREATORS.COM
Patrick J. Buchanan needs no introduction to VDARE.COM readers; his books State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America, and Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025? are available from Amazon.com. Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of “The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority.
His latest book, published May, 2018, is “Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.”
See Peter Brimelow’s review: “Wheel And Fight”—Pat Buchanan’s Nixon Book Provides Road Map For Trump.


vdare--2020-09-21--The Multicultural Booker Prize: No Britons Need Apply

The Booker Prize used to be the most prestigious award in British fiction .
There are six finalists on the shortlist for this year 's prize .
The first thing you notice is , not one of the six is British .
They changed the rules six years ago .
Now any writer writing in English and published in Britain is eligible .
Five of the writers on this year 's shortlist are American ; the sixth is from Rhodesia .
That 's more than averagely annoying to me .
When I published my Coolidge novel here in New York @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the National Book Award .
I actually got a phone call from them .
Was I an American citizen ?
they wanted to know .
I confessed that I was n't , not yet .
Oh , sorry , they said , that means you 're not eligible .
I was vexed , of course , but I did n't feel any injustice had been done .
Rules are rules , and this rule was a fair one .
This new Booker Prize rule is not fair to British authors .
They are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in English .
Their contributions are just getting swamped .
Hilary Mantel , for instance , brought out the third volume of her Wolf Hall trilogy about Thomas Cromwell this spring—a best-seller for sure .
It 's not on the Booker Prize shortlist .
Why would the Booker people perpetrate such an injustice against British authors ?
Diversity , that 's why .
Worldwide , the tally of people who ( a ) can write English , and ( b ) have literary ambitions includes not only Americans but millions of Africans , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such .
Why restrict the prize to boring white-bread Brits when there is all that vibrancy on tap ?
Hence the lady from Rhodesia , who is of course black .
Two of the other five are also black : one an Ethiopian-American gal , one an American black guy from Alabama .
Along with the three blacks , there 's an Indian-American lady and two whites , one male , one female .
The white male is a homosexual ( as also , by the way , is the black guy from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incredible to say , has a husband and two kids .
She looks quite normal .
I 'm calling tokenism on that one .
I have n't read any of these six finalist novels , and I do n't intend to .
Reading about them , `` imaginative '' is not the first word that comes to mind .
That black homosexual from Alabama studied biochemistry in the Midwest .
His novel is about , according to the New York Times , `` one pivotal weekend in the life of Wallace , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Midwest . ''
The other homosexual on the Booker shirt-lift … Oh dear , I beg your pardon : I meant to say `` short-list . ''
The other homosexual , the white one , grew up in the Glasgow slums .
He describes himself as , `` the queer son of a single mother who lost her battle to addiction . ''
His novel is about a young boy growing up in Glasgow in the 1980s with a mother who is struggling with alcoholism .
`` A powerful , heartbreaking yet beautifully @ @ @ @ @ @ @ addiction , '' says this Scottish newspaper I 'm reading .
The author now lives in New York .
Would it be presumptuous of me to guess that his next novel will be about a Scottish homosexual living in New York ?
Probably .
Even when they 're not totally self-referential , these books lean heavily to the left .
The one by our token straight white lady , for example `` explores a mother-daughter relationship in a world ravaged by climate change and overpopulation . ''
The white Scottish homosexual , talking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , quote , `` so many people suffered through a difficult time under Thatcher in the 1980s . ''
British lefties have an everlasting angry grudge against Maggie , parallel to the one our own commies have against Reagan .
The Alabama guy 's novel , says one reviewer , quote : And so on and so on .
This is what gets fiction prizes in 2020 .
Be progressive , be transgressive , and write about yourself , yourself , yourself .
After all , what else is real ?
Thomas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would anyone want to write about him ?
He probably owned slaves .
Evelyn Waugh would not be shortlisted for the Booker Prize in 2020 .

The Booker Prize used to be the most prestigious award in British fiction. There are six finalists on the shortlist for this year's prize.
The first thing you notice is, not one of the six is British. They changed the rules six years ago. Now any writer writing in English and published in Britain is eligible. Five of the writers on this year's shortlist are American; the sixth is from Rhodesia.
That's more than averagely annoying to me. When I published my Coolidge novel here in New York in 1996, it was considered for the National Book Award. I actually got a phone call from them. Was I an American citizen? they wanted to know. I confessed that I wasn't, not yet. Oh, sorry, they said, that means you're not eligible. I was vexed, of course, but I didn't feel any injustice had been done. Rules are rules, and this rule was a fair one.
This new Booker Prize rule is not fair to British authors. They are a small minority worldwide among people writing in English. Their contributions are just getting swamped. Hilary Mantel, for instance, brought out the third volume of her Wolf Hall trilogy about Thomas Cromwell this spring—a best-seller for sure. It's not on the Booker Prize shortlist.
Why would the Booker people perpetrate such an injustice against British authors? Diversity, that's why. Worldwide, the tally of people who (a) can write English, and (b) have literary ambitions includes not only Americans but millions of Africans, Indians, Pakistanis, Caribbeans, and such. Why restrict the prize to boring white-bread Brits when there is all that vibrancy on tap?
Hence the lady from Rhodesia, who is of course black. Two of the other five are also black: one an Ethiopian-American gal, one an American black guy from Alabama. Along with the three blacks, there's an Indian-American lady and two whites, one male, one female. The white male is a homosexual (as also, by the way, is the black guy from Alabama).
The white female, incredible to say, has a husband and two kids. She looks quite normal. I'm calling tokenism on that one.
I haven't read any of these six finalist novels, and I don't intend to. Reading about them, "imaginative" is not the first word that comes to mind. That black homosexual from Alabama studied biochemistry in the Midwest. His novel is about, according to the New York Times, "one pivotal weekend in the life of Wallace, a black gay biochemistry Ph.D. student in the Midwest."
The other homosexual on the Booker shirt-lift … Oh dear, I beg your pardon: I meant to say "short-list." The other homosexual, the white one, grew up in the Glasgow slums. He describes himself as, "the queer son of a single mother who lost her battle to addiction." His novel is about a young boy growing up in Glasgow in the 1980s with a mother who is struggling with alcoholism. "A powerful, heartbreaking yet beautifully written account of poverty, homophobia and addiction," says this Scottish newspaper I'm reading.
The author now lives in New York. Would it be presumptuous of me to guess that his next novel will be about a Scottish homosexual living in New York? Probably.
Even when they're not totally self-referential, these books lean heavily to the left. The one by our token straight white lady, for example "explores a mother-daughter relationship in a world ravaged by climate change and overpopulation."
The white Scottish homosexual, talking about his book to an interviewer, said, quote, "so many people suffered through a difficult time under Thatcher in the 1980s." British lefties have an everlasting angry grudge against Maggie, parallel to the one our own commies have against Reagan.
The Alabama guy's novel, says one reviewer, quote:
crackles with the painful comedy of privilege and prejudice … His supposedly benign white friends … view him as a mirror in which to assess their own lives, often in self-congratulatory fashion.
And so on and so on. This is what gets fiction prizes in 2020. Be progressive, be transgressive, and write about yourself, yourself, yourself. After all, what else is real? Thomas Cromwell, some 16th-century dude? Why would anyone want to write about him? He probably owned slaves.
Evelyn Waugh would not be shortlisted for the Booker Prize in 2020.


vdare--2020-09-21--"He'd Live Longer On Death Row"—INTERCEPT Reports Black-On-White Murder 21 Years Later, With Killer

"He'd Live Longer On Death Row"—INTERCEPT Reports Black-On-White Murder 21 Years Later, With Killer STILL Not Executed

Earlier : THE FULFORD FILE : “ It ’ s All A Damned Conspiracy ” —When Black-On-White Murders Contradict The Narrative , The MSM Doesn ’ t Want You To Know TVTropes , on a page about people being afraid to inform on mob bosses , says : This is true : Death Row amounts to protective custody .
Rapist-kidnapper Caryl Chessman , who was executed in 1960 , 12 years after his crime might have been killed by other inmates if he 'd been in a regular prison .
But people live a long time on Death Row , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawyers who work hard to help murderers escape the penalty of their crime .
The Intercept has an article about a black carjacking that killed a white couple in 1999 , and was sentenced shortly thereafter .
Brown [ the killer 's white mother ] was at the federal penitentiary in Terre Haute , Indiana , to see her son Christopher Vialva .
He had only recently arrived on death row .
In June 1999 , just over a month after his 19th birthday , Vialva and a group of younger teenagers had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Fort Hood , Texas , shooting them and setting their car on fire .
Vialva ’ s co-defendant , Brendan Bernard , was 18 at the time .
He too was sentenced to die .
Vialva and Bernard were the first people to get a federal death sentence in the Western District of Texas .
It was six years after Bill Clinton ’ s 1994 crime bill expanded the federal death penalty , and new death sentences were climbing .
Although all the cases involved coldblooded killings , they were not the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Americans might have associated with federal death row .
Several of the condemned were strikingly young .
Vialva told his mother that one man had spotted him in the recreation yard in Terre Haute and shaken his head .
“ Damn , man , ” he said .
“ They ’ re putting babies in here.
” Trump Prepares to Execute Christopher Vialva for a Crime He Committed as a Teenager Vialva is the first Black man to face execution during Trump ’ s killing spree .
He is set to die @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a 19-year old is n't a baby , he 's old enough to drive a car , get married , get a job , vote , join the Armed Forces , and vote in an election .
He 's also old enough to be executed for murder .
( The Supreme Court decided that a 17-year old , who can do all of that but vote , ca n't be executed , thus saving the lives of some of Vialva 's accomplices . )
In Vialva 's case , he was old enough @ @ @ @ @ @ @ white couple and set fire to their car—on a Federal Reservation , which is why it 's a federal case .
The Intercept has a lot of stuff about how racist it is that blacks who commit murder get the death penalty , nothing about how racist the murders were .
That 's not part of the Narrative .
They also mention the case of Keith Lezmond , who the officials of the Navajo Nation wanted to save , for that they say are Indian cultural reasons .
My headline on that story @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Murderer Of Navajo Woman And Navajo Child Executed ; His Lawyers Are Claiming `` Jury Bias '' .
But returning to the execution of the now 40-year old Vialva , twenty years after his crime , one of the claims for clemency is that during the unconscionable delay between his murder and his execution date , he has somehow reformed , and become a better person .
One of the replies to the Intercept 's tweet above said : I do n't know it science does prove `` we are new people at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Vialva is alive at all is , once again , a miscarriage of justice .

Earlier: THE FULFORD FILE: “It’s All A Damned Conspiracy”—When Black-On-White Murders Contradict The Narrative, The MSM Doesn’t Want You To Know
TVTropes, on a page about people being afraid to inform on mob bosses, says:
An epsiode of CSI had a hitman refuse a deal to name the man who hired him in exchange for not facing the death penalty, figuring he'd live longer on death row.
This is true: Death Row amounts to protective custody. Rapist-kidnapper Caryl Chessman, who was executed in 1960, 12 years after his crime might have been killed by other inmates if he'd been in a regular prison. But people live a long time on Death Row, because of anti-Death Penalty activists and the lawyers who work hard to help murderers escape the penalty of their crime.
Despite the assumption that the federal death penalty is the “gold standard” for capital cases, defendants often encounter the same poor lawyering and misconduct found in state trials — yet with the benefit of even less judicial scrutiny after the fact. https://t.co/npface3lpO — The Intercept (@theintercept) September 21, 2020
The Intercept has an article about a black carjacker that killed a white couple in 1999, and was sentenced shortly thereafter.
Brown [the killer's white mother] was at the federal penitentiary in Terre Haute, Indiana, to see her son Christopher Vialva. He had only recently arrived on death row. In June 1999, just over a month after his 19th birthday, Vialva and a group of younger teenagers had carjacked and killed a young married couple in Fort Hood, Texas, shooting them and setting their car on fire. Vialva’s co-defendant, Brendan Bernard, was 18 at the time. He too was sentenced to die. Vialva and Bernard were the first people to get a federal death sentence in the Western District of Texas. It was six years after Bill Clinton’s 1994 crime bill expanded the federal death penalty, and new death sentences were climbing. Although all the cases involved coldblooded killings, they were not the kinds of terrorist acts or mass murders that Americans might have associated with federal death row. Several of the condemned were strikingly young. Vialva told his mother that one man had spotted him in the recreation yard in Terre Haute and shaken his head. “Damn, man,” he said. “They’re putting babies in here.” Trump Prepares to Execute Christopher Vialva for a Crime He Committed as a Teenager Vialva is the first Black man to face execution during Trump’s killing spree. He is set to die on September 24, By Liliana Segura, The INTERCEPT, September 20 2020
Of course, a 19-year old isn't a baby, he's old enough to drive a car, get married, get a job, vote, join the Armed Forces, and vote in an election. He's also old enough to be executed for murder. (The Supreme Court decided that a 17-year old, who can do all of that but vote, can't be executed, thus saving the lives of some of Vialva's accomplices.)
In Vialva's case, he was old enough to commit a double murder of a white couple and set fire to their car—on a Federal Reservation, which is why it's a federal case.
The Intercept has a lot of stuff about how racist it is that blacks who commit murder get the death penalty, nothing about how racist the murders were. That's not part of the Narrative. They also mention the case of Keith Lezmond, who the officials of the Navajo Nation wanted to save, for what they say are Indian cultural reasons.
My headline on that story was Navajo Nation Doesn't Want Navajo Murderer Of Navajo Woman And Navajo Child Executed; His Lawyers Are Claiming "Jury Bias".
But returning to the execution of the now 40-year old Vialva, twenty years after his crime, one of the claims for clemency is that during the unconscionable delay between his murder and his execution date, he has somehow reformed, and become a better person.
One of the replies to the Intercept's tweet above said:
Cases such as this highlight how the death penalty is a barbaric act, how it harms the innocent, from families to every person that reflects on these people. I am pained by his sentence , & it won’t heal the family of the victims. Science proves we are new people at 40 vs. 20.
I don't know it science does prove "we are new people at 40 vs. 20" but the fact that Vialva is alive at all is, once again, a miscarriage of justice.