July 24, 2010
"JOURNOLIST: A Vast White-Wing Conspiracy?"
Instapundit links to I Own The World's collection of the names and faces of Journolist. Glenn stresses whiteness, but I Own says "IT LOOKS MORE LIKE THE UPPER WEST SIDE OF MANHATTAN" and the commenters eventually — scroll halfway down — pick up that cue.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
215 comments:
1 – 200 of 215 Newer› Newest»With 13 out of 66 being women, it's a white wing sausage fest
Why are there so many Jews conspiring behind the scenes in the media to ensure the election of someone like Barack Obama ... who is himself completely inimical to Israeli interests?
Barack Obama is standing idly by while Iran constructs the next Holocaust and it seems like a lot of Jews in in the media are on the Journolist ... a list uncovered of media co-conspirators who have been acting in concert to suppress negative coverage of Barack Obama and attack Israeli supporters such as Sarah Palin.
Why are there so many Jews on the Journolist?
Can some of your Jewish commenters, Ann, explain what is going on?
Ham, you're such a Moby. Or is it the other way around?
There is no one with a foreign name? There is no one with a minority/ethnic background. Are these the progressive democrats? What losers? I need a new democratic party.
"Ham, you're such a Moby."
GMay, rather than name-call, why don't you answer the question: "Why are so many Jews conspiring secretly in this way to help Barack Obama - who is hurting Israel and snubbing Israeli's at every turn?"
It's not all bad. there is one asian or as they refer to him "Sulu". I hear they were looking for an Uhura as well, but then thought, one scary ethnic was enough.
"... and the commenters eventually — scroll halfway down — pick up that cue."
Jews: That's what Ann was driving at.
There seem to be a disproportionate number of Jews participating in a clandestine media elite conspiracy to act in unison to suppress critical news coverage of Barack Obama and to attack conservative Christians such as Sarah Palin.
About halfway down, the commenters start to notice all the Cohen's and Persteins and Rosens.
There's even a Judis.
I mean, it's right out of central casting.
There is no one with a foreign name?
Define "foreign name," please.
I'll guess Mr. Klein is Jewish. Maybe they all worship together?
This is the reality of white liberal Manhattan.
White liberals in Manhattan are in favor of somebody else integrating the world and creating all that marvelous diversity.
Living in Brooklyn or Jersey City (especially Jersey City) is a stain on one's social resume.
Those white liberals seldom have to face the reality of black on white crime, so they tend to dismiss it as racist propaganda. Their children all go to private schools, so they don't worry about the kids getting beat up on the way to school.
Increasingly, the world of Manhattan white liberals is dominantly gay, and that world is an even white sub-culture. And, that culture is mostly out of touch with the world of families and children.
But, the Manhattan white liberal sure is in favor of other people integrating the university and creating vibrant diversity.
NewMobyHam asked: "GMay, rather than name-call, why don't you answer the question:
Because clearly the Jewish cabal that owns the world banking system, media, and black helicopter manufacturing corporations have a vested interest in Israel remaining downtrodden and poor so they can continue to steal your money, the airwaves, pull off spectacular hip shots from the grassy knoll, use fire to melt steel for the first time in history and keep Hoffa's location sooper seekrit.
Now answer my question:
Do you Moby in your underwear, or from your mother's basement?
....and why do so many of those pictures set off my GAY-dar!!
Could they have found a creepier photo for Mr. Stein?
"I hear they were looking for an Uhura as well, but then thought, one scary ethnic was enough."
Wins the thread.
Sorry GMay but Ms. Althouse is with us. What do you think "THE UPPER WEST SIDE OF MANHATTAN" means?
"Because clearly the Jewish cabal that owns the world banking system ..."
Project much?
A sign at the butcher shop..
Conservatives need not apply.
GMay wrote:
With 13 out of 66 being women, it's a white wing sausage fest.
Well yeah if you mean Little Smokies.
Looking at this list of liberal media types, is it not a little rich that Tucker Carlson has the balls to call others political hacks?
Wow, there's getting to be so many trolls and sock-puppets here that I find myself waiting for Kermit the Frog to come out and introduce Shields & Yarnell.
And DA LINKBAIT takez over da worldzzzzzz!
It's generally a good idea to, before saying something, ask whether it's something that Glenn Reynolds would say or approve of. If so, seek therapy.
Not only does pointing out how they're white simply drive home far-left racial concepts, it also opens up "other issues".
Plus, Jesse Taylor isn't white.
Basically, Ham, it's because Jews are over-represented on the far left. Marxism is particularly attractive to Jews because their history of oppression has led them to value community, mutual support and isolation from other groups. Think the shtetl or the Jewish ghettos in urban areas.
Secular Jews who have rejected the community of the Temple tend to turn to utopian political activism. That's a part of why they hate Israel--it exists in the real world and deals with its problems using practical pragmatic methods. And they feel it is doing so in their name.
In any group of activist liberals, you're going to find a lot of Jews.
Schindler's ... er, Carlson's List:
1. Ezra Klein
2. Dave Weigel
3. Matthew Yglesias
4. David Dayen
5. Spencer Ackerman
6. Jeffrey Toobin
7. Eric Alterman
8. Paul Krugman
9. John Judis
10. Eve Fairbanks
11. Mike Allen
12. Ben Smith
13. Lisa Lerer
14. Joe Klein
15. Brad DeLong
16. Chris Hayes
17. Matt Duss
18. Jonathan Chait
19. Jesse Singal
20. Michael Cohen
21. Isaac Chotiner
22. Katha Pollitt
23. Alyssa Rosenberg
24. Rick Perlstein
25. Alex Rossmiller
26. Ed Kilgore
27. Walter Shapiro
28. Noam Scheiber
29. Michael Tomasky
30. Rich Yesels
31. Tim Fernholz
32. Dana Goldstein
33. Jonathan Cohn
34. Scott Winship
35. David Roberts
36. Luke Mitchell
37. John Blevins
38. Moira Whelan
39. Henry Farrell
40. Josh Bearman
41. Alec McGillis
42. Greg Anrig
43. Adele Stan
44. Steven Teles
45. Harold Pollack
46. Adam Serwer
47. Ryan Donmoyer
48. Seth Michaels
49. Kate Steadman
50. Matt Duss
51. Laura Rozen
52. Jesse Taylor
53. Michael Hirsh
54. Daniel Davies
55. Jonathan Zasloff
56. Richard Kim
57. Thomas Schaller
58. Jared Bernstein
59. Holly Yeager
60. Joe Conason
61. David Greenberg
62. Todd Gitlin
63. Mark Schmitt
64. Kevin Drum
65. Sarah Spitz
So now anyone who criticizes Journolist, including for them deeming their opponents racist, will now be deemed anti-semitic?
Oy veh.
Conservative used to mean conversative.
New Ham, to answer your question-the reason is that Barak Obama is a socialist and is working to destroy Christianity as our society's foundation. That trumps any perceived allegiance to Israel. They are a people without a country.
I think the journolist should have just been named "Things white people like" but I guess that name was taken on the web. Oh well, I'm sure they have some black friends they buy dope from, so its all cool.
I don't think it's anti-Semitic to point out that that list of people is over 50% Jewish. I noticed it pretty quickly because I was scanning the names and I don't know who most of these people are so their backgrounds didn't come to mind - but with so many similar Jewish last names it's pretty obvious. That doesn't mean I want to round them up and put them into a gas chamber. You will find Jews over-represented in News media period. Just the way it is.
"Basically, Ham, it's because Jews are over-represented on the far left."
So.
That's not the question.
The question isn't "Why are so many Jews Democrats." Jews are free to join whatever political party they want.
The question isn't: "Why are are so many Jews liberals." Jews in America are free to espouse whatever political philosophy they wish.
The question isn't: Why are there so many Jews in Manhattan. Jews are free to live where ever they want.
The question isn't: Why are there so many Jews who support Barack Obama. Jews are free to vote for whoever they want.
The question is: Why are there so many Jews secretly conspiring to slant news coverage of Barack Obama in a false way? Acting in unison. Coordinating media coverage to fix our national elections? Slandering conservative Christians.
Once people start conspiring to suppress criticism of Barack Obama, and to coordinate their efforts across the whole of the American media landscape ... then I think it's fair to question whether that's legal, moral or ethical.
And to wonder why it is that so many Jews are participating in this immoral activity.
It's wrong.
New Hussein Ham:
Jews: That's what Ann was driving at.
There seem to be a disproportionate number of Jews participating in a clandestine media elite conspiracy to act in unison to suppress critical news coverage of Barack Obama and to attack conservative Christians such as Sarah Palin.
It wouldn't be the first time that a group acted against their own self interest. More likely their liberalism simply trumps their jewishness. Because they've lived in America, they may not even see a linkage between themselves and those other Jews.
There is also allegiance to an idea. Namely, Libs these days have an ideology that is decidely anti Zionist. ZIonisim is the lesser satan to American's Greater Satan (though they of course wouldn't couch it in religous terms) as libs, even american libs, generally do not like this country and feel it is the source of most of the evil in the world and view Israel as the proxy of America (similar to the Islamist view by the way). For Jews to become part of the club of liberalism they have to basically renounce those other Jews and accept the liberal orthodoxy.
Back in the 60's you'd often find more radical whites working with Black Panthers despite the fact that it would seem to run counter to both their interests. The white revolutionary tells the black panthers that he too is against the evil imperialistic racist Amerikkka and that he is one of the good whites, unlike those who work for the system.So he is accepted.
This by the way is also why you have gays protesting against Israel under the banner "Queers for Palestine". Common sense would tell you that if you compared how Israel treats it's gays versus how Palestinians or Muslims in general treats it's gays that it would be against your interst to put your support behind groups so anti gay if you are gay. If you looked at liberal values of Israel versus the Middle east muslims you would simply have to side with Israel since the rest of the region doens't even make a pretense of standing for Israel.
But that doesn't matter. The liberal orthodoxy is to be against Israel and all its zionistic imperialistic tendencies, and so if you wish to be part of the club you go along. And to do that you distinguish your own jewishness from theirs. The liberal jew is not one of the bad ones, it's those others who are carrying out genocide or whatever evils the liberal orthodoxy is saying Israel is guilty of.
It's stupid and moronic, but then again, libs have never been that smart.So what do you expect?
Fo Sheezy, Ta-Nehisi Coates was on Journolist, and he sure looks black to me.
I think the author on I Own The World is making a really stupid point if he's making a point at all. The racial composition of the list is anecdotal and an ad hominem factoid, and ought to be uninteresting to conservatives who have more substantive issues to criticize -- herd journalism, co-option of journlists by their sources, preening liberal elitism, juvenile attitudes in the media, etc.
Isn't that more than enough?
It is true there are a lot of Jewish surnames, but what strikes me most is that this looks like a cross section of the people who were social outcasts in middle and high school and never got over it.
Resentment, envy, and vindictiveness are the real sentiments that animate liberals, thus the addiction to self righteous indignation and the violent revenge fantasies that are so prevalent amongst them.
A lot of the liberals I know, at least the virulently passionate ones, share this psychological profile.
And I know a lot of liberals.
I am really sick of this "anti-semite" smear. Not all Russians were Communists. But did that mean we should not have faced down the Russians?
Not all jews are actively trying to undermine Christianity and hence the United States. But a large majority of those who are doing this are jews. Should this fact just be ignored? Folks, we are at WAR! We are fighting for the soul of our country!
I don't see 'Jews' I see leftards. Plain and simple. It doesn't matter what their ethnic affiliation is, but rather what their political affiliation is. Blacks also are larger adherents to Marxist types of ideology/theologies, but are there any blacks on the list? Who cares. It's what you think, not what your genetic genre happens to be. Leftardism must be defeated, not just refudiated. Anyone who calls themselves a progressive is a lying sack of moonbat shit that is nothing more than fifth columnist garbage and an enemy of the US.
This group brings real "upper west side" soul
to their work, and hence to the rest of us the us rabble in America.
(rap starts at 0:30)
Paul, can you provide some examples of the violent revenge fantasies among the liberals you know so well?
@HT: Besides Spencer Ackerman's?
Libs would have no problem with that group's ethnic (non-)mix. They're all about telling *others* how to structure their lives, while exempting themselves. The Tea Party is racist, because it doesn't have sufficient minority representation, yet their club is about as white as you can get. Oh, and forget that the "racist" group is comprised of any individual who wishes to identify with it and the "non-racist" group is by invitation only.
IT LOOKS MORE LIKE THE UPPER WEST SIDE OF MANHATTAN
Oh the urbanity!
*blimp crashing in background*
Well first let me refer you to the Spencer Ackerman and Sarah Spitz emails that have garnered so much attention.
But I have heard many liberals, who don't know my political inclinations, talk about their desire to see George bush and Dick Cheney "swinging from a rope" or tortured to death. Comments like who would be the first against the wall if they had their way (insert prominent conservative's name)are ubiquitous. The examples I've come across are too numerous to mention.
@EPR: LOL
"Paul, can you provide some examples of the violent revenge fantasies among the liberals you know so well?"
Are you asking this question because you don't think these childish liberals have violent revenge fantasies?
Have you even read the Journo-list archives? They're full of violent revenge fantasy (throwing conservatives thorugh plate glass windows ... wishing Rush Limbaugh's heart would explode).
Do your own legwork. Read the Journo-list archives.
These are a bunch of pimply 101st Keyboardists who clearly don't get outside much and don't have a girlfriend.
Which, let's face it that's the root cause of their hatred for us.
They can't get laid.
Thank you "journalists", for helping elect Barack Obama. He and the democrats are fantastic.
Just knowing the journalist industry is activly campaigning for one particular political party is really comforting.
Thank you for your professionalism.
I kind of agree with Scott at 12:59..
Be carefull chasing Khan in the nebula.
I was surprised that there were so many attractive women on the list. Some had a five o'clock shadow and looked exactly what you would expect, but there really were some lookers.....Paul Krugman as a younger man looked even more sinister and untrustworthy.
@ Lem: But "I don't believe in the no- win scenario" (Had to).
But, yeah. It's not that I'm going to get all worked up about them being of Jewish heritage. I's just, I noticed it. It's noticeable. And somewhat, statistically speaking, interesting.
The most I can make out is that upper west siders dont get invited to upper east side dinner parties.. or something.
Oh the urbanity indeed..
You know Pollo you didn't need to mention the blimp.. I'm confident of that.
American Jews are just pissed off at Republicans because some Republican wouldn't let their great great grandfather into their Connecticut country club in 1921.
That's all this is about, and explains everything.
The secular Jews fell for Marxism in the 1930s because the Republicans didn't - and the secular Jewish red diaper babies and their parents fell for communism in the 40s and 50s and 60s because they perceived it as being the Un-Hitler.
They were wrong, but liberals haven't been smart for decades.
"The racial composition of the list is anecdotal and an ad hominem factoid ..."
No it's not. It's stunning photographic evidence that these people exclude the Other from their group.
They self-select in such a way that excludes anyone of color.
They're fucking hipster racist douche-bags.
WV: Macher.
"Oh the urbanity!" *blimp
Thread runner up.
"Upper West Side" sure sounds like an anti-Semitic slander to me.
In the battle of competing negative stereotypes the left clearly fits the one the right has been assigning it, even better than they thought it did.
As I read somewhere recently: "You are not nearly as paranoid as you should be."
Ham@ 12:07
Why are there so many Jews on the Journolist?
Can some of your Jewish commenters, Ann, explain what is going on?
Charles Johnson, is that you?
Sandra Bernhard, the comedienne with a face like a grouper, wished Sarah Palin would be gang raped by black men in Harlem.
Wanda Sykes, another homely woman, wished for Rush Limbaugh's kidneys to fail. That got an appreciative chuckle from our very classy President.
Jeez the examples are all over the place.
I didn't even notice the Jew thing. You need to be wired for that. Us rubes aren't really tuned that way. To us the only problem with Jews is their liberalocity.
"The racial composition of the list is anecdotal and an ad hominem factoid ..."
Bullshit.
Remember: The membership of Journo-list was controlled exclusively by racist employees of the Washington Post newspaper. Only "approved" white became members.
If you were black, or Hispanic, or Hmong, ... you were excluded and kept from the halls of power.
It's stunning photographic evidence that these people exclude the Other from their group.
If it is 'photographic' why cant we just let it stand?
Let it speak for itself.. Anything we (conservatives) say can and will be used against us in their bully pulpits.
It reminds me of the MSNBC lineup!
"I didn't even notice the Jew thing. You need to be wired for that."
No you don't.
If there were 3 Jews ... THEN you'd need to be "wired for that."
The list is almost wholly - comically - Jews.
And you have to be lying, or willfully blinding yourself to that fact in order to advance a false sense of your own faux political correctness.
Why are Jews in the media conspiring in large groups secretly to suppress criticism of Barack Obama and then to slander white Christian politicians?
It is wrong.
Jews need to answer this question. They need introspection.
I ask you: If Muslims were secretly conspiring to take over the US media and to secretly coordinate news coverage to elect someone named Hussein, would the media would be asking questions?
@bagoh20 1:42
I know its hard to believ for some.. but it happens to be true for me.
I hear some people can tell via the last name.. as in Goldman from The Bird Cage (1996).. the first time I heard about this pseudo superpower ;)
"Anything we (conservatives) say can and will be used against us in their bully pulpits."
They're calling us racists and accusing people of yelling "nigger" regardless. You saw what Pelosi and Co. did on the Capital during the health care debate.
Liberals do not require "evidence" that you're a racist. They will call you one whether you are one or not because they believe they obtain a political advantage by doing so. It is not an accusation ... it's a strategy.
You can either lay down for it, or you can fucking get in their faces and punch them back twice as hard.
You lay down for it if you want to.
I choose to fucking punch them.
:And you have to be lying, or willfully blinding yourself to that fact in order to advance a false sense of your own faux political correctness."
I'm serious. I looked through every photo and name and I never noticed the Jewishness until I came back here and seen the comments. I never notice it. I grew up in small town PA and nobody ever talked about Jews. We had them. They went to a different church and wore funny hats sometimes, but no animosity or even much acknowledgment that they were different in any way. I still have that. I just don't notice. I think it's a big city thing - especially a northeast preoccupation.
liberalocity.
I understand everybody had a window seat.
(tough crowd)
NewMobyHam asked: "Project much?"
Dick up the meaning of the term "project" much?
Very simply: The views of a Jew (or Jews) are not Jewish views.
Jews are not monolithic. They have a wide range of views. Certainly, most of them here in the US - all polls show - call themselves liberals and hold mostly liberal political views.
But those are the result of historical and cultural reasons having little to do with the religion (yes, tikkun olam and all that). If you did a survey of Jews in Israel, you'd get some quite different results, I would guess, compared to American Jews.
TidyMoby asked: "What do you think "THE UPPER WEST SIDE OF MANHATTAN" means?"
I think it means...wait for it....
The upper west side of Manhattan.
Jews need to answer this question. They need introspection.
No.. you need introspection..
Or as Palin might say Introsfection.
"To us the only problem with Jews is their liberalocity."
Bullshit.
This is wholly inaccurate and a shitty thing to say. It's still a free country.
I could care less whether Jews are liberals. They are free to follow whatever philosophy they want to. I encourage them to.
Jews however are not free to conspire to surreptitiously coordinate news coverage across the whole of our nation's media landscape in order to slander white Christian politicians, all the while suppressing any negative coverage of Barack Obama.
That will not stand.
I don't care if Jews vote for Barack Obama. It's a free country.
But if Jews think they can secretly join cabals designed to slant news coverages in the United States then they're going to open Judiasm to some legitimate criticisms in precisely the same way that we would criticize Muslims for acting in secret plots.
"Jews are not monolithic."
These Jews were.
You guys don't get it. These dudes aren't "real Jews." They hate and fear the Jews that I call my friends. The Jews who really mean it and actually practice their religion in their everyday life. Who have integrity. Who are proud to wear the symbols of their religion and to proclaim their religiosity to all who see them walking down the street. Who are not full of self-loathing and existential angst. Those Jews embarrass hipster doofus scumbags like Ezra Klein. They are too de classe for them.
They are pretend Jews. They might go to Temple on the High Holy Days to shut up their bubbies but they find the practice of the actual tenets of their religion distasteful and retro and silly. Sort of the same way they feel about patriotism. They are way too hip for that.
Aren't a large number of conservative pundits and reporters also Jews?
It's a civil war and we have no business picking sides.
These guys are Jews the same way Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden and John Kerry are Catholics.
The way Roger Clemins and Wade Boggs were Yankees. I mean they were on the team and all but they were never and will never be "True Yankees."
@New "Hussein" Ham: OK, Imma let you finish, but first... I know I shouldn't respond to you because there is nothing I could write to in any way alter your preconceived notions... and yours appear to be emotionally invested and pretty defensive; BUT... I hate when so called Christian-Based Groups plot bullshit to kill people, or humiliate people, or intimidate people **. BUT DO You ever say THERE GO THOSE WHITE CHRISTIANS AGAIN, this will not stand. ALL White Christians should explain themselves for this. C'mon.
** Various (but not all) militias, "race warriors", etc. Phelps & his Crew, etc, etc.
New "Hussein" Ham said...
Why are there so many Jews conspiring behind the scenes in the media to ensure the election of someone like Barack Obama ... who is himself completely inimical to Israeli interests?
Who were the Kapos at places like Auschwitz?
shoutingthomas said...
This is the reality of white liberal Manhattan.
White liberals in Manhattan are in favor of somebody else integrating the world and creating all that marvelous diversity.
These are the are the same people who wanted higher taxes on 'the rich' in places like Massachusetts and, when they found out those taxes applied to them (no such thing as a poor white liberal), moved to New Hampshire, Maine, Vermont...
Similar phenomenon in CA regarding NV and AZ.
I just saw their pictures. Judas Priest, no wonder I've never seen them on TV.
Is every one in Georgetown and the Upper West SIde this ugly?
A more telling attribute is that they all received a big dose of higher education. I bet the curriculum was nearly identical for most every one of them, including "ethics".
Dude didn't you ever watch Seinfeld?
Considering the foreign policy of the guy they were pushing, the " Kapos at places like Auschwitz" analogy is not far off.
These Jews were.
And what part of their "Jewishness" led to this conspiracy? Something in the Torah? Maimonides' teachings? What?
You're confusing their ideology and education and background with their Jewishness.
Take this same group, strip away their Jewish background (whatever part they had), give them the same education and upbringing and presto, you'll have a buch of liberals.
"Aren't a large number of conservative pundits and reporters also Jews?"
There's nothing wrong with being a Jewish pundit.
There's nothing wrong with being a Jewish reporter.
Nobody is criticising these people for being pundits or reporters.
We're wondering why the Journo-list ... membership of which was controlled by racist employees of the Washington Post ... was made up almost entirely of white Jews who felt it necessary to secretly join together to suppress legitimate criticism of
Barack Obama and to coordinate their slanders of Christian politicians such as Sarah Palin.
Why are white Jew racists in the media (remember, they wouldn't let any blacks join!) meeting in secret cabals to coordinate their slanders?
"And what part of their "Jewishness" led to this conspiracy? Something in the Torah? Maimonides' teachings? What?"
What part of their Muslim'ness led to this conspiracy? Something in the Koran? Mohammad's teaching? What?
I ask you: When Muslims gather together in large secret groups to coordinate their efforts to slander Jewsish politicians ... we have no hesitation to criticize their activities, do we?
Similarly, when large groups of Jews join together across the whole of the media landscape to secretly control which candidates will be criticized and which candidates will be favored then these people open Judaism to legitimate criticism in precisely the same way that Muslims do when Muslims secretly coordinate their activities to slander and malign Jews.
What's good for the goose is good for the Jew.
I think modern antisemitism usually needs a bed of sophistication to develop. This is one of a number of advantages of being unsophisticated, which I have never been able to learn my way out of, thankfully.
Trooper York says: These guys are Jews the same way Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden and John Kerry are Catholics.
So now you are both Pope and Chief Rabbi, and therefore able to determine who is a Catholic and a Jew? Hope you got a pay raise for all that extra work and responsibility.
And the Yankees seemed pretty happy to claim Roger Clemens until the steroid allegations kicked in.
I rather limit myself to discussions of left vs right, right vs wrong.
I don't want to tread where NHH wants to go.
I want to disasociate myself from his remarks.. I'm thru refudiating them.
I'm not sure if the "Upper West Side" observation is actually antisemitic -- it might be literally true, that many of these people are on this list not only because they share the same political objectives, but because they know one another -- they live in the same place and go to the same parties.
So that would partly explain the trivial fact that there are quite a few Jewish names on this list. Had Journolist started in Pennsylvania Dutch country, there'd probably be a lot of Yoders on there.
Of course, there aren't many Amish liberals, or Amish journalists. Most Jews are liberal. Jews are probably over-represented in a profession like journalism, partly because there are a lot of Jews in media centers like New York (or, as liberal Democrat Jesse Jackson called it, "Jew York" or "Hymietown"), and partly because of the fact that Jewish tradition virtually requires a high degree of literacy and scholarship.
But then again: Who really cares?
Having read the comments at this "I Own" site's post, it appears as though this issue was brought up by trolls and Mobies. Which is ironic, since there are so many comments here from Mobies.
Seriously, this is becoming an infestation, and a distraction.
Let me try and muddle through this one.
We all recognize, to use an analogy here, that we have conservative Christians and liberal Christians in America. Both derive their views from Jesus's teachings, from the Sermon on the Mount, from the New or Old Testament and other Christian teachings or doctrine.
But we also recognize that how they enact or live out those teachings comes from their cultural and political and social experiences and views. One group believe in, for example, liberal economic policies; another believes in conservative social policies. Their differences are obvious.
Their religion, their Christianity is, of course, part of how they view the world and interact with it and act upon it. But each groups unique historical and political experiences and background is what leads to these acts. Religion is, in many ways, secondary to these other factors.
We can see this with Christians. Why can't some people see this with Jews?
What's the problem here?
Or should that be I'm done refudiating them?
Ah of course it's once again... the Jooos. Always the Joos!
What's good for the goose is good for the Jew.
Really? Why wasn't I notified? Or it only applies to liberal Jews?
I now prefer "refudiate". A much more complete term. Palin genius again. There is a place for us unsophisticated rubes. We have much to offer.
ask you: When Muslims gather together in large secret groups to coordinate their efforts to slander Jewsish politicians ... we have no hesitation to criticize their activities, do we?
When we have radical Muslisms urged on by radical Mullahs citing the Koran and calling for the deaths of Jewish "pigs", yes, we can see that some - some, some, some - Muslims are acting based on, as they see it, Islam's religious teachings.
Once again: where in the teachings of Maimonides or Abraham or other Jewish thinkers is this conspiracy coming from? I've read these e-mails. Where is the Torah mentioned? Where are Jewish thinkers cited to promote these journalist's views?
You keep repeating this tautology: these are Jews therefore their Jewishness is driving them. And what is driving them? Their Jewishness.
Nowhere can you cite in Jewish thinking or teachings where they are being urged to do what they do.
Is it a J-School requirement you need to be ugly? These characters are too homely even to play nerds.
"Take this same group, strip away their Jewish background (whatever part they had), give them the same education and upbringing and presto, you'll have a bumch of liberals."
You're missing the point. This wasn't just a group of random liberals who came together by happenstance. It was specifically a group of self-selected Jews - whose membership was tightly controlled.
You had to not only be a liberal to be a member ... you also very likely had to be a Jew to get in (although a small number of non-Jews were admitted). No blacks were permitted because it was a racist institution. No Hispanics were permitted. No Vietnamese were permitted. I've seen no Hmong among the membership.
No ... membership in Journo-list was very tightly controlled racially and religiously - by employees the Washington Post.
Otherwise, there wouldn't be so many Jewish members. Otherwise, Jewish representation would match Jewish membership in society as a whole. The list is almost entirely made up of white Jews in the media. If liberalism was the only criterion, there would be statistically fewer Jews on this list.
And there'd be some black people.
But there's no blacks. Mostly only white racist Jews who excluded people of color.
How these racists are able to maintain their employment is beyond me.
"somefeller said...
So now you are both Pope and Chief Rabbi, and therefore able to determine who is a Catholic and a Jew?"
Yes. Yes I am.
Not only that, but I am also the Grand High Exhalted Mystic Ruler of the International Order of Friendly Sons of the Raccoons!
Seriously.
I don't have any exalted title.
I just know lying sacks of shit when I seem them.
You would too somefeller if you just stop kidding yourself.
This wasn't just a group of random liberals who came together by happenstance. It was specifically a group of self-selected Jews - whose membership was tightly controlled.
And there isn't a single shred of evidence to support your argument. We have the e-mails (or many of them). There is simply no evidence of this bias.
The only bias appears to be ideological. These were a self-selected group of liberal journalists - a club - getting together to exchange views.
The entry to the group was ideology. Not religion. Not race. Not gender. Ideology.
Once again: there's no such thing as "the Jews". Just as there is no such thing as "the blacks". Or "the whites". Or "the Asians."
There' just people who are Jewish or black or white or Asian. All unique human beings. All different. None the same.
I think if Glenn Reynolds and Ann Althouse had actually looked at www.iowntheworld.com, they wouldn't have linked to it. The web op seems to do a lot of race baiting and Jew baiting. This is not cool on any level.
"The entry to the group was ideology. Not religion. Not race. Not gender. Ideology."
Perhaps, but it sure turned out to select for all those things somehow.
Which even if innocent, would be decried by them as proof of racism if it was conservatives in the same highly selected group.
Not to say that there is not a bunch of lying sacks of shit on the other side as well.
There are plenty of conservative politicians who pretend to be religious family men who bang everything they can get their hands on. But they generally lose their jobs when their shenaigens come to light.
See Vito Fosella.
Of course you can be a thief and a liar and a crook for decades and the liberal press and pundits will and the Democratic establishment will cover your ass.
See Charlie Rangel.
But Charlie Rangel is a war veteran. Don't you respect war veterans?
(roflmao)
Perhaps, but it sure turned out to select for all those things somehow.
There were reportedly more than 400 on the list. We have pictures of about 60 or so?
I doubt that Ezra Klein was going to not let a black liberal journalist in because of race. If Clarence Page or Bob Herbert wished to join, he'd have let them in.
Again, Ta-Nehisi Coates was on Journolist. He's black.
I wonder if this partial list of Journolist members was put together by a liberal, who wanted some conservatives to make antisemitic observations.
Ham,
I'm Jewish and a conservative. There's lots of us (off the top of my head, William Kristol, Robert Kagan, Mark Levin, Dennis Prager, Michael Slaughter, Jonah Goldberg, Charles Krauthammer, Eric Kantor, Yuval Levin, Daniel Pipes, Howard Kurtz, David Brooks, Mona Charen, etc. etc. etc. These folks I believe are ethnically Jewish, though I don't know their religious affiliations)) and I don't know why many of the Journolisters are young and Jewish, though I would go so far as to say they were liberalized by elite schooling, which tends to do that.
Those of us who received fine educations at public universities (mine was Miami University, in Oxford, Ohio) are perhaps not so liberal and don't write blogs, but rather tend to deal with making a living in business or the professions.
Jews tend to value education and I would daresay that Jews are more highly educated than most ethnic groups. Some go left while others go right...
Surely this is all a gross generalization, but not much more so than any inference that all Jews are Trotskyites or worship Obama. We don't as a rule because there is no rule...
@Pastafarian: No shit, ya think?
This Althouse post is a head-scratcher. It crosses the line into gratuitous controversialism without proving a point that she would be willing to defend.
Who knows, maybe with this precedent, we will see future Althouse posts link to articles on www.stormfront.org. That would be even more controversial and stupid.
Scott -- I don't know if it's slam-dunk obvious. Some people thought that the Sherrod video snippet was put out there by liberals, but that seems pretty paranoid to me.
If it was, that one blew up in their faces.
Ham, if you see this, the question you say I didn't answer in my post, go back and read my post again. It is answered.
@Pastafarian: Serendipity happens. There doesn't always have to be some nefarious Hungarian currency speculator behind the scenes pulling the strings.
I wonder if this partial list of Journolist members was put together by a liberal, who wanted some conservatives to make antisemitic observations.
In this war is safe to assume everything is a trap.
"And there isn't a single shred of evidence to support your argument (that the Journo-list was a racist institution). We have the e-mails (or many of them). There is simply no evidence of this bias."
Here is the damning evidence: Ezra Klein, an employee of the Washington Post, and the originator of the Journo-list, tightly controlled its membership.
People would ask to join the list, and then Ezra would consult with other top members of the list to decide whether to grant membership.
No coloreds needed apply.
No VC were PC.
No Hmong were among.
There were no Yemeni, no Arabs. Ruskies were verboski.
The Washington Post employee Ezra Klein refused to admit people of color because he is a blatant racist who works for a racist institution (the Washington Post has a piss-poor history of hiring black people as well).
This was a Jew Klan, no question about it. Is there any wonder why they're all Democrats?
"The only bias appears to be ideological."
Membership was based almost exclusively on race and religion (liberalism was a given).
Blacks were not allowed even though 95% of all blacks are liberal, and not a single Muslim liberal was admitted (you do realize that there are Muslims who are liberal, don't you?)
These were racists conspiring to rig the election.
This was a Jew Klan, no question about it. Is there any wonder why they're all Democrats?
Okay, I tried to give you a respectful hearing but you can't engage in one on this topic.
You can't see actual human beings. You just see race or religion or something else.
There is simply nothing in these e-mails to indicate that the members were using their religion for anything whatsoever. There is no mention of it anywhere.
Once again: A thought from a Jew is not a Jewish thought. A list of (mostly) Jewish people is not a Jewish list. There is nothing "Jewish" in these e-mails.
Good day.
@Ham, can you see how overusing the charge of racism tends to trivialize it and, over time, make it less credible?
There are lots more damning criticisms that can be leveled at Klein, and his Journolist, and the Washington Post, particularly relating to corruption of the institution of Journalism as it relates to its role in a free society. The racism issue is a diversion and a blind alley.
Assuming most charges of racism and antisemetism are dirty bombs..
Why should conservatives be in that market when clean conventional ones will do?
Smash a leftwinger through a plate glass window take a picture and send it as a Crismas card.. hypothetically speaking of course.
"The web op seems to do a lot of race baiting and Jew baiting. This is not cool on any level."
Jew baiting?
Is any criticism of Jews off limits?
Is it verboten?
Are they a special race of untouchables? A pure race of peoples above criticism?
Is that what you are implying?
When large groups of Jews come together across the whole of the mainstream media to conspire secretly to suppress criticism of Barack Obama ... then Judaism is going to come under a considerable amount of legitimate criticism.
I don't see any Jewish congregations distancing themselves from these people. I see no condemnations issuing forth from the nation's synagogues.
If these were Muslims conspiring to rig our elections, there'd be demands for investigation and condemnations. Would there not?
There doesn't always have to be some nefarious Hungarian currency speculator behind the scenes pulling the strings.
lol
Stop showing off Scott.. I mean keep it up the good work.
"You can't see actual human beings. You just see race or religion or something else."
I see a very large group of white Jews - employees of the nation's top newspapers - who deliberately excluded all people of color from their halls of power. That's the very definition of institutional racism.
And that it is being committed by Jews is stunning to me.
You refuse to acknowledge that this racism exists and until you do, it will continue and we won't be able to have a post-racial presidency.
Yes, Ham, any criticism of "Jews" is off limits. It is by definition ad hominem.
I was interested in what Sarah Spitz looked like. I don't think that Rush Limbaugh is going to want to kiss and make up.
Is Soros hungarian?
@Lem: Thanks. I just know a lot of big words. :)
And I do think there is a nefarious Hungarian currency speculator pulling a lot of strings. If Ian Fleming was alive to create a new shadowy villain for Bond to battle, he could do worse than to model him after George Soros.
(Off to KFC. Partner is hungry!)
He is power-hungerian.
Soros is a US citizen of Hungarian extraction.
Speaking for myself, witch is nearly impossible to do as I live with a strager ;)
It is safe to say we are all Jews.
see 9/11.
I wouldnt put it past Soros to Solidly be behind it.
Scott said... "I think if Glenn Reynolds and Ann Althouse had actually looked at www.iowntheworld.com, they wouldn't have linked to it. The web op seems to do a lot of race baiting and Jew baiting. This is not cool on any level."
Scott, that is my point. I didn't need to look beyond that one post to see what was going on, and I blogged basically to point out that Glenn missed it.
sorry for the typos upthere..
I'll be more careful next time.
Ann Althouse is an expert at providing chum for her anti-Semite readership.
"I didn't need to look beyond that one post to see what was going on ..."
What was going on? Don't be coy, Ann!
Were the Journo-listers deliberately excluding blacks? Were they deliberately excluding Catholics?
Is pointedly noting this institutional racism by running their photographs somehow anti-Semetic?
I'm reminded of the guy who posted the pictures of the MSNBC on-air talent: All whites.
No blacks.
When 400 liberal journalists are invited by employees of The Washington Post to join a private list designed so that they can coordinate their attacks ... and not a single black person is invited to join ... Ann, this is institutional racism.
That almost all of these racists were Jews is just shocking to me.
Ann Althouse is an expert at providing chum for her anti-Semite readership.
Which consists of two posters who are either ignored or, as I tried, refuted.
If you want to see anti-semitic comments, go to a lefty blog - Joe Klein or Greenwald - when the topic is Israel.
and the commenters eventually — scroll halfway down — pick up that cue.
Congratulations, Althouse, on noticing that your blog is not the only one that attracts a variety of leftist sockpuppets, mobies, and blast-email "action alert" spammers.
What a revelation!
After seeing enough of this behaviour, one starts to wonder if lies and deceit are all that leftists have to offer to the marketplace of ideas.
(Added: I see now, Althouse, that you've popped into this thread to comment, but rather than condemn the leftist bigots infesting your own blog (overrunning this very thread!), you throw even more slander at the Iowntheworld blogger. That's a disappointing and pretty skanky move on your part.)
I'm very disapointed SMG..
You pass up a chance to use the word refudiated ;)
Pastafarian said...
Scott -- I don't know if it's slam-dunk obvious. Some people thought that the Sherrod video snippet was put out there by liberals, but that seems pretty paranoid to me.
If it was, that one blew up in their faces.
Quite possible I'm wrong, but I think the source was the NAACP. You know, trip him up making some racially charged statement that could be twisted to destroy him.
Think Jimmy the Greek or Al Campanis.
New "Hussein" Ham said...
"The only bias appears to be ideological."
Membership was based almost exclusively on race and religion (liberalism was a given).
Blacks were not allowed even though 95% of all blacks are liberal, and not a single Muslim liberal was admitted (you do realize that there are Muslims who are liberal, don't you?)
You might want to reflect on that one. They vote solid Democrat, but, outside voting what they think are their interests (I believe the Demos have snowed them royally), their politics might be less Leftish on things like guns than we might think. There really are black people who hate what's going on inside their communities.
Scott said...
And I do think there is a nefarious Hungarian currency speculator pulling a lot of strings. If Ian Fleming was alive to create a new shadowy villain for Bond to battle, he could do worse than to model him after George Soros.
Why do you think a lot of Conservatives (Michelle Malkin chief among them, I believe) call him Dr. Evil?
Ann Althouse is an expert at providing chum for her anti-Semite readership.
Sue this fucker. I will provide my services pro bono. Then take his house.
So now the Libtards are playing the Jew card.
Typcial.
Democrats are scum. Their principles are as flexible as their interns.
Phil; Ann Althouse is an expert at providing chum for her anti-Semite readership.
Fuck off racist Libtard.
Sue this fucker. I will provide my services pro bono. Then take his house.
Before Althouse's 7/24/10 4:07 PM comment I would have agreed with your sentiment, Seven.
Now? Meh.
Pot. Kettle.
This is one of a number of advantages of being unsophisticated, which I have never been able to learn my way out of, thankfully.
No kidding. It never occurs to me that someone is Jewish until some Libtard makes it a racial issue.
And oh, my wife is Jewish.
As is every woman thats ever been an influence in my life.
Fuck, I hate to have to jump in here, but - in order to defend my friends at iOwnTheWorld - I guess I have to:
This is all bullshit. Glenn Reynolds is playing his usuual BS card with me. I've been telling him forever to drop the race shit. Then, yesterday, Roger L. Simon wrote that he's sick of talking about race and I did a snarky post about it - and sent it to Glenn. (You'll have to check my blog because I'm not writing this from my computer.) Instead of linking to that, he went to Roger's and linked it IN ALL CAPS, which I took (maybe wrongly) as a message that he didn't appreciate my post. If Glenn looked at my previous posts, he probably saw I had the iOwnTheWorld graphic up as well, and decided to send another message - that he thought I was being hypocritical - and linked that up, too. I'm not sure, but that's how I read it.
Like I said in my post, Glenn Reynolds, Roger L. Simon - whatever you want to call the libertarian, Law Professor, Pajamas Media clique - makes me tired.
Here's the deal: As a former liberal black bomb-thrower, I know how to be racist towards others and I want out. The fact others around me - almost all white - won't help with that is distressing. We Americans are obsessed with race, and we don't see it, which fucks up our best efforts to escape it. So I've adopted a no-tolerance position. But even I ain't perfect, so when my friend and fellow artist at iOTW, Big Fur Hat, did his Journolist graphic, I thought the subject timely enough to run with it as well, giving Glenn a way to needle me without saying so. (I acknowledge I could be wrong about all this - Reynolds may not think about me at all.) But, from where I sit, it sure looks that way.
As far as iOTW being anything but anti-PC, that's bullshit. They're straight-shooters who (as artists and conservatives) refuse to kow-tow to the rest of you who seem to have succumbed to the pussification of the nation, nothing more.
To say they engage in Jew-baiting, etc. is a flat-out lie.
That's a pretty vile site there. I'm reassured by the pushback here.
Scott and SMG -- Good work. Thanks.
Allen S said...."I was interested in what Sarah Spitz looked like. I don't think that Rush Limbaugh is going to want to kiss and make up."
LOL...my wife and I and were discussing this breed of dog (spitz) last night. Turns out we both had one as we were growing up. Mine look better than "Spitz the Hater". A real two bagger.
BTW, Ann can verify some of this, because I also sent her my post on Roger L. Simon, hours before Glenn did his ALL CAPS post.
He can be real chickenshit.
Phil has been trying to stir the Althouse pot for 4-5 days now since the incident with Sherrod. He was probably sent here by Kos or HuffPO or Greenwald. Ignore the asshole & New Ham is my advice.
As to I Own The World, I don't think their post was motivated by any anti-Semitism. I think they were just trying to expose the nerds of Journolist.
@Ann Althouse, who wrote:
"Scott, that is my point. I didn't need to look beyond that one post to see what was going on, and I blogged basically to point out that Glenn missed it."
And you didn't email him about it first? Jeez. Give the man the chance to post a mea culpa, like, "Update: I didn't at first see how anti-semitic the site was before I posted this, my apologies." Instead, you just sorta smacked him.
Scott said...
"Again, Ta-Nehisi Coates was on Journolist. He's black."
Yeah, and Coates actually decided not to drink that coolaid. So the black guy on journolist is one of the few to think for himself. What does that tell you?
"What does that tell you?"
Why don't you enlighten all of us about what this tells us.
Ham is almost certainly a moby. Ridiculous comments.
I didn't think upper west side indicated "Jewish." I thought it was supposed to indicate "wussy, white, urban liberal." Perhaps the way it reads depends on where you're from.
David,
I thought the same thing when I saw Coates' column.
I don't know why, but we black guys are standing apart from what we read - on the right or left. It seems to be taken as "disruptive" amongst the online leaders, but that seems to be the best way to go, because - let's face it:
The online leaders ain't always straight-shooters.
Jews (rhymes with) Shmoos (and snooze.) I blame Al Capp. And Little Abner--that Althouse hillbilly.
Too bad old All Capp isn't here. (He would be 110.) He would set lots of things straight.
New Hussein Ham wrote:
"Jews are not monolithic."
These Jews were.
IF they are monolithic, they are monolithic in their liberalism not their judaism. That's the difference. So the fact they are jews is indcidental to the fact that they are also assholes.
They are liberals who just happen to be Jewish as opposed to Jews who just happen to be liberal.
"Al" Capp, with one "l" and two "p's."
The typo king.
It's a disability.
I've gote an unrelated question:
Does anyone know if Tucker Carlson has the entire JournoList archive?
I think the John Edwards blackout was a result of the JournoList. Only a look at the whole thing would determine if I'm right, so I want to know if he's giving us what he has or not. Is there more?
Ham is almost certainly a moby. Ridiculous comments.
If not a moby then a zealot.
Crack.. I rather conservatives don't get 'down and dirty'.
Leave that to the left.
James Taranto found about eight Jews named "Klein" on the JournoList.
Lem,
Alinsky changed all that.
Lem wrote: I wouldnt put it past Soros to Solidly be behind it.
"Solidly" = sordidly
This is getting icky.
Who needs a "conservative Journolist" when people can read the Althouse comments.
(Reposted without the bad edit)
I think the John Edwards blackout was a result of the JournoList. Only a look at the whole thing would determine if I'm right, so I want to know if he's giving us what he has or not. Is there more?
Thats a good question.
What Journolist needed, was a comment section for the public.
That should've read:
"James Taranto named about eight Jews named 'Klein' on the JournoList."
thanks Pollo..
sordidly is better. did you catch the pp ss bb?
IAlinsky changed all that.
I confident we can win w/o Alinsky.. its fun in a way, I'll grant you that.
Scott -- I don't think it's a big deal. Instapundit is a big boy.
Aren't you advocating a certain Journolist insiderism also? Let's be out front with everything. That's what I say.
New Hussein Ham wrote:
The question is: Why are there so many Jews secretly conspiring to slant news coverage of Barack Obama in a false way? Acting in unison. Coordinating media coverage to fix our national elections? Slandering conservative Christians.
Because many jews are libs, and libs want to see Barack Obama elected. Why are they coordinating media coverage to fix national elections? Because liberals are notorious liars? Seriously, where do you think agit prop came from. Consider the source and understand that while the soviet union disappeared from history socialism/communism as a mindset never went anywhere. Also those radiclals from the 60's, who were simply arguing socialism didn't die .They went on to become teachers, journalists, directors. And now spread their ideas to the nest generation.
Why are the slandering christians? Because liberals are good at slandering people? And because many christians are conservative?
THeir jewishness is incidental to their liberalism. And it's their liberalism that allows them to be such liars. Put the blame where it belongs.
"James Taranto named about eight Jews named 'Klein' on the JournoList."
If that is true (I'm not not refudiating you) then I'm disappointed.
there was an extra not in my last comment.
I find the banter about Jewish stereotypes tedious. I'm off to an AA meeting. Bye.
I invite everyone to google "David Letterman's Hate, Etc." and "Mikey Weinstein, Jesus-Basher." See what a thoughtful person I am?
"I'm off to an AA meeting. Bye."
And I'm working on my 5th beer. Bye.
Althouse, I'm with Freeman Hunt at 5:11. And I don't see any overt antisemitism here, other than from a few commenters, who are called out on it, and are declared Mobies, by the other (apparently regular) commenters.
You should sympathize with this blogger on that score.
Maybe I'm wrong; maybe this is a nut-job site. I'll poke around in it a little more, although it doesn't appear to be my cup of tea. From what I've seen, it's not very well-written, and it's somewhat nasty, and the humor is just stupid.
Example: One recent post shows a photo of Michelle Obama christening a ship, with this text:
"Here we see the First Hatey christening the USS Downright Nasty Country. I would like to have seen the bottle survive and Meshell break into a million pieces.
I wonder what the ChamPAIN brand was?"
Jesus Christ. That's just painfully stupid. Even if they're not racists, they should be roundly condemned for awful writing. It's shite like this that really makes a person appreciate Althouse or Ace of Spades HQ.
"THeir jewishness is incidental to their liberalism. And it's their liberalism that allows them to be such liars. Put the blame where it belongs."
I think that's true: my last roommate was a Jew who was waaay more conservative than I am. A big guty who loves to (physically) fight. That worm who was talking about throwing people through plate glass windows would've cowered before him.
The problem is communism/socialism - not being a Jew.
Marylee, you're going to have to help me out. I'm obtuse. What were we supposed to find by googling those phrases?
The first result from the first phrase was a comment by some crazy person on some blog I've never heard of, where the topic was David Letterman's joke about A-Rod and Palin's daughter. I don't get it.
Please explain as if you're talking to a small, slow-witted child. Thanks in advance.
I don't mean to join the Pro-Defamation League, but the following criticism seems to be fair: The journolist group lacks diversity. The writers on the list are people who continually exalt the virtues of diversity and tolerance, but this group is remarkably homogeneous. If the Harvard Law Review, the NYPD, the carpenter's union, and the Supreme Court (ha) are groups that benefit from diversity, why not the journolist? Diversity for thee but not for me. I think of the Bob Dylan line: Ain't no sense in talking to you; it's just the same as talking to me.
Crack Emcee wrote:
I think the John Edwards blackout was a result of the JournoList. Only a look at the whole thing would determine if I'm right, so I want to know if he's giving us what he has or not. Is there more?
While I wouldn't say for sure that it was specifically a result of the journolist, I would definitely argue that the media in general sat on the story beause ti would otherwise damage Edward's presidential chances. In other words, the media doesn't need a journolist per se to bury the story.
Though, if journolist was directly involved I certainly wouldn't be surprised.
"bagoh20 said...
I didn't even notice the Jew thing. You need to be wired for that. Us rubes aren't really tuned that way. To us the only problem with Jews is their liberalocity"
Positioning yourself as willfully blind does not enhance you as truly so uncaring and nonobservant about race, religion, ethicity that the obvious slips by.
1. Muslims did 9/11? Why for years, thinking religion was just such a side matter and we should all just get along...I really didn't think about it!
2. Half the murders and 60% of the armed robberies are by under 1% of the population? Young black thugs? Honestly, I am so colorblind and think artificial labels like race are just a distraction!
3. Half the Communist Party leadership in the US and Soviet Union 1915-1945 was Jewish? So?? And 80% of the Journolist Cabal was Jewish.....why do people notice such utterly irrelevant data??
========================
GMay is one of the Jews that believe if someone raises the matter of Jewish radicalism, being the majority of those caught in financial scandals, or ovverepresentation to outright dominance over institutions - the best defense is an attack mocking, deriding, and condescending to the questioner.
Who, even if asking honestly, will be shamed and go away.
That tactic has really backfired on Jews over the millenia as they are kicked out of group after group, country after country.
One of the last big ones was the great purge of Jews out of the black organizations. (Which started a decade after the Soviets determined too many Jews were in positions of influence in and out of the Party and were serving "The Tribe" over "the People's Soviets".
In the 60s, after a decade of asking why blacks were not admitted in sizable numbers to leadership spots in NAACP, black unions, CORE and hearing "Oh, surely you know we control the world! Why are you asking that - are you an anti-semitic person like HItler? Maybe because we care more about uplifting Negroes than most blacks do, so where is your gratitude, boy? Or - do you honestly think you can do without our money, lawyers, and brains as you ask those stupid questions??"
The result was pretty dramatic - in two years fed up blacks tired of the arrogance and patronization tossed the Jews out of organizations they had set up and run for blacks (and for themselves) for a half century. Not done - blacks then got every Jew councilman or elected judge or Congressional Rep or school administrator in a majority black district tossed from office.
Jews screamed black anti-Semitism and black ingratitude for all Jews did as adults for their black children.
40 years later, plenty of mistrust on both sides. BUt it all started with blacks asking honest questions and being mocked and having their questions and concerns thrown back at them.
Freeman Hunt wrote:
I didn't think upper west side indicated "Jewish." I thought it was supposed to indicate "wussy, white, urban liberal." Perhaps the way it reads depends on where you're from.
If you want to put a face to the upper west side liberal I direct you to the remake of You've Got Mail with the character played by Craig Kilborn. His character is a perfect example of the wussy white urban liberal. He's the premiere expert on Julius and Ethel Rosenberg (and proably thinks they weren't spies) and only uses typewriters because of their purity. And of course he only votes democrat and is such a snob that when the Meg Ryan character (who is also a prissy stuckup snob) says she forgot to vote one year he says "I FORGIVE YOU!" That guy DEFINITELY was an Obama voter, and if he were a real person would probably have written multiple hit pieces on that moron Sarah Palin in his job at the Village Voice. In short, he's an insufferable prick.
Lem said...
Speaking for myself, witch is nearly impossible to do as I live with a strager ;)
It is safe to say we are all Jews.
see 9/11
It was a stupid slogan pushed by Zionists and Christian Zionists meant to mean that 9/11 had created a to the bone solidarity with the 51st state and "Our Special Friend" Israel...who were the best to instruct us on how America should respond to 9/11 and deal with Muslims and Terrorists.
It was also a way to cast 9/11 as with WWII, as All About Us Jews - while simultaneously denying the rise of fascism & WWII had anything to do with the Red Terror and bloody Jewish communist revolutionary work in Western Europe, or 9/11 had anything to do with the US's tilted ME policies.
We were no more "All Jews Now" after 9/11 than we were "All Soviet Communists Now" after the war between the two Great Totalitarian Powers started.
Cedarford wrote:
"Oh, surely you know we control the world! Why are you asking that - are you an anti-semitic person like HItler? Maybe because we care more about uplifting Negroes than most blacks do, so where is your gratitude, boy?"
You know, that has to be the best impression of a Jew I've ever heard! If you close your eyes you can just hear jews making that speech, especially the part about how they control the world. It's uncanny!
Cedarford divined: "GMay is one of the Jews..."
So I'm a Jew now? How, pray tell, did you arrive at that most comical conclusion?
Ooooh oh oh, tell me what I'm thinking...right now.
(Hint: It rhymes with - lura nucking fidiot)
Cedarford wrote:
BUt it all started with blacks asking honest questions and being mocked and having their questions and concerns thrown back at them.
if the questions blacks asked were things like "Why do jews control the world?" do you wonder why Jews might throw the question back. Especially if, for example, the Jews don't actually control the world. That's like saying It all started when the Muslims asked honest questions about why the Jews used Christian blood to make matzoh and then saying that the muslims turned against the jews because they didn't want to answer the honest questions about their christian killing practices.
This thread turned out to be a science experiment, like leaving cottage cheese out on the kitchen counter for a month. Althouse used to have the most extraordinary comments section, but the weeds choke out the garden now - it happens with a lot of comments sections. I'm not sure whether Althouse herself has changed, or whether it's a law of entropy.
Maybe any unmoderated space turns into a podium for the spittle-flecked. I think those of you trying to introduce intelligence and sanity mean well, but ignoring the stupid and malicious commenters would be more effective. Is an intelligent conversation possible despite the noise?
Just damn. I wish someone clued me in when I was married to the Jewish Princess from Philly. A child who could have attained a position in the worldwide cabal of the Jews and I would be in the know. Just think of it, an inside track to more money and power. More contacts on the continent, the real hidden movers and shakers. The possibilities endless. Oh well, Joy died and the rest is history.
I never knew that I lost something
but my wife until I was told about the money and the power of the Jews. Thanks for the reminder Cederford.
snark off/ the bar is open.
"GaspodeWoof said...
Althouse used to have the most extraordinary comments section, but the weeds choke out the garden now."
You seem new around here dude. This has been going on for a long time. If you don't like what people are saying you need to jump right in and start swinging.
The best defense is a good offence.
Just damn. I wish someone clued me in when I was married to the Jewish Princess from Philly. A child who could have attained a position in the worldwide cabal of the Jews and I would be in the know. Just think of it, an inside track to more money and power. More contacts on the continent, the real hidden movers and shakers. The possibilities endless. Oh well, Joy died and the rest is history.
I once dated a girl who's family was a member of the illuminati and I was looking forward to controlling the world through my membership in the secret society once we got married.
I didn't quite get where the illuminati's dominance began and the Jews dominance ended and where the overlap was, but I assumed such information would be revealed to me once I officially joined.
But we broke up.
Althouse used to have the most extraordinary comments section, but the weeds choke out the garden now."
Very true. How (or why?) does someone bother to challenge C4 or Ham? And why does Ann allow her blog to become a venue for these diseased cretins?
Is Althouse an antisemite? No. But does she allow her blog to harbor the ravings of the "Jews control the world" zealots" in a bizarre attempt to promote debate? Increasingly.
"bagoh20 said...
I didn't even notice the Jew thing. You need to be wired for that. Us rubes aren't really tuned that way. To us the only problem with Jews is their liberalocity"
Cedarford said...
"Positioning yourself as willfully blind does not enhance you as truly so uncaring and nonobservant about race, religion, ethnicity that the obvious slips by."
It wasn't willful blindness, I said us rubes aren't wired that way. You probably were too once. I'm sorry you paid in money or energy to get that fucked up education, but don't try to drag us rubes down in a feeble attempt to make your own bigotry seem like an enhancement. You bought a stupid and worthless set of ideas and the only thing dumber is expecting the rest of us to share it. We're free - you're a slave to it now.
Look Mian:
Alhouse does not edit her comments - got it? If she did it would be a full time job for her. She tilts in favor of free speech no matter how ugly or biased.
Maybe Journolisters should adopt the same philosophy so their employers' readers could have read more about Obama's ties to his beloved Rev. Wright or Bill Ayers.
Or do you think that would be bad?
The bottome line is- what do you value more? A censored Althouse comments section or a freewheeling, uncensored let-the reader-decide Washington Post or Time Magazine? Because today, it appears the Wapo and Time have an embargo on news and facts and stories that don't suit the far left liberal reporter's worldview.
As I recall JR565, I ended my comments with snark off. If you don't know the meaning of snark, look it up. As to my comments, I was married to a Jewess who died before we had children. I agreed to raise our children Jewish before marriage. My snark was aimed at those who claim there is a Jewish cabal in the world which is an absurd notion.
As for you, JR565,
I hope you never experience the death of a wife. I have found that there are cruel people in the world. They are easy to recognize.
I call bullshit about how great this comment section used to be. It's always had lame-ass commenters, and Althouse always put up with it (with very, very few exceptions), and I used to bitch and moan about it, too, but she eventually won me over with the simple argument that promoting free speech means promoting free speech.
This little fracas, though, reminds me of how here in Chicago, people have apparently always bitched that our locally-owned rock station WXRT used to be so awesome. In fact, it was always filled with unmemorable shit along with the nuggets of brilliance. Nostalgia is the craziest thing.
Anyway, get over it. At least here, Cedarford can be told he is a raving idiot loon douchebag and mobies can be called out. If it gets to be too much, move along. I certainly do from time to time.
RB_VI,
"As for you, JR565,
I hope you never experience the death of a wife. I have found that there are cruel people in the world. They are easy to recognize."
Dude, that's one of the hardest things for me to deal with: when you can relate the most awful shit and people online are cruel or snarky. I get that everyone doesn't share in the experience but there's some stuff that goes way beyond what personal experience should tell you is worth appreciating.
The death of your wife definitely qualifies.
Crack,
It's so easy for so many because they have never experienced any real adversity in their lives.
But then on the other hand some people are just mean and arrogant no matter what they have experienced.
Have a good night!
Is an intelligent conversation possible despite the noise?
Yes. Learn the commenters' names. Then you'll know who to skip.
AJ,
I've liked this blog and have read it for a long time and am a big proponent of free speech, even if transcends good taste though I believe, like most people, that there are limits. Still, the point someone made about the 'weeds' in the comment section resonated with me.
Frankly, I'm tired of reading C4's shit and delusional ramblings and don't think others (or myself for that matter) should constantly have to assert that there is no such thing as a Jewish cabal.
Someone else mentioned that Althouse "is an expert for providing chum for her anti-semetic readership" and while I don't think that's true, I always know when the nazis are going to show up by her choice of topic.
I just don't want to be around to participate in their discussion any more.
Post a Comment