Monthly Archives: September 2012

Huffington Post Essay on Ron Paul and Third Party Voting

Here is an essay by Brian LaSorsa from Huffington Post, “Is a Vote for Ron Paul a Vote for Obama, or the Product of a Disenfranchised Right?”

In the end, though, we have meaningful questions to ask: are third-party voters betraying the Republican Party, or are these voters a product of the Republican Party betraying the ideals of small government? And, even if Ron Paul were to swing the election, is it possible that conservatives and libertarians are so disenfranchised that their symbolic votes of displeasure have become more important than winning a race to the White House?

Read more…

Cross posted at IPR.

The author, Brian LaSorsa, is listed as an intern at FreedomWorks. He might not be after they see this. FreedomWorks has tried to serve as an organizing force for the TeaParty, but it is reliably Republican.

Virgil Goode and Gary Johnson Confirm for Third Party Presidential Debate

I came across this article on Facebook:

Free and Equal Elections Foundation announced today that four candidates have confirmed their participation in the 2012 Presidential Debate at the University Club of Chicago on October 23: Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson, Green Party candidate Jill Stein, Constitution Party candidate Virgil Goode, and Justice Party candidate Rocky Anderson.

This debate is the only 2012 Presidential Debate featuring four candidates. The top six candidates were invited to participate. Democratic Party candidate and incumbent Barack Obama and Republican Party candidate Mitt Romney are welcome to participate in this historic debate. The moderator will be announced shortly.

Read more…

 Cross posted at IPR.

“Regional Equity”—Obama’s Coming War On Whitopias

“Regional Equity”—Obama’s Coming War On Whitopias

By Jesse Mossman, September 27, 2012, VDare

Paul Kersey recently reported on an emerging trend: for white suburbs to secede from larger urban jurisdictions and so form, in effect, whitopian enclaves.

But he did not mention that there are powerful forces on the other side pushing back hard—using a concept called “Regional Equity.”

Americans can be forgiven for not being familiar with Regional Equity. I had not heard the term myself until just a few weeks ago, when I caught Stanley Kurtz on the radio talking about his new book: Spreading the Wealth: How Obama is Robbing the Suburbs to Pay for the Cities.

Put Regional Equity into a search engine and the language of the collectivists surfaces: transportation equity, environmental equity, healthcare equity, social justice, smart growth, and especially, sustainable communities.

The essence of Regional Equity is the use of centralized political power make things equal over regions—disregarding jurisdictions.

President Obama is very much on board with the Regional Equity movement.

[Continue reading....]

Mark Shea on Catholic Voting Ethics

In the post below, I wrote “Reconstructionists similar to DeMar have been the most likely to make the case for a Christian voting ethic that precludes simple lesser of two evils considerations.” This is true among Protestants. I should add that Catholics have a very long tradition of making Christian ethical arguments about voting, most famously when it comes to abortion, but otherwise as well. Here is Mark Shea’s take on the issue. The first link is to an article he wrote for the National Catholic Register. The second link is to a follow-up blog post. His logic tends to lead to the rejection of the two major party candidates.

Cross posted at IPR.

Does Joel McDurmon Disagree with His Boss (Gary DeMar) on Third Parties

I don’t know that much about the structure of American Vision, but I assume I am correct to call Gary DeMar Joel McDurmon’s boss.

Anyway, Gary DeMar recently wrote a tired apologia attempting to make the case for why Christian conservatives should vote for Bankster/War Party Candidate B so that Bankster/War Party Candidate A won’t get another term. I replied to his article here.

So I was a bit surprised to see this Sept 25th post by Joel McDurmon which might not make the boss too happy. McDurmon links to a Mediaite column that is critical of a couple of Breitbart columns imploring Ron Paul supporters and libertarians to support Romney in the name of stopping Obama. The Breitbart columnist even had the audacity to invoke the Constitution when mainstream “conservatives” spent the whole primary calling Paul and his supporters bad names for actually wanting to follow it. While McDurmon doesn’t explicitly call for Paul supporters to vote third party or write in Paul, he linked to an article that is clearly hostile to the idea of voting for Romney. McDurmon recently wrote a book on the Bible and war that may explain his seeming sympathy for Paul.

What is so baffling about Gary DeMar’s refusal to consider third party voting is that Reconstructionists similar to DeMar have been the most likely to make the case for a Christian voting ethic that precludes simple lesser of two evils considerations (William Einwechter, Doug Phillips, Michael Peroutka, John Lofton). Also, Reconstructionists make up a disproportionate share of the Constitution Party.

Hopefully McDurmon’s good instincts will rub off on DeMar with time.

We are not interchangeable parts in the function of the machine

So the proverbial stuff has hit the fan when it comes to the NFL lockout of the regular officials. Not only did the scabs make a bad call in a NFL contest, par for the course, but they made one which cost a team a game. And not just any old team, but one of the most popular in the NFL: the Green Bay Packers.

To say Wisconsinites are livid after what happened Monday night is an understatement. Even those supporting Gov. Walker against the public employee unions are not the kinds of people who employ those who know nothing about electricity rather than employ a union electrician. Thus only an ideological idiot would say “Yes, continue with the Division III refs because Lord knows we have to hold the line against unions.”  They also know that one’s tax bill and a mere difference of $3.3 million (which is the sticking point in the negotiations between the refs and the NFL) is not the same thing. NFL will make $10 billion in revenues this season.

Ultimately it’s up to the owners to settle this thing since NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell works at their behest. As much as they may want to hoard their cash they also don’t want their teams to be robbed a playoff berths (and the money you make from them) because of some bush league official and his bad call. Not to mention the fact the games are getting damn near close to the point of violence between players themselves and coaches and officials for their ball calls. This not the Flint Sit-Down Strike here, not even the Wisconsin brouhaha of 2011 here. We’re talking $3.3 million or a whole season of tarnished games (and were just past Week 3, plenty more to go). It’s in everyone best interest to bring the professionals back and send the amateurs back to where their level of football competence, otherwise they would be locked out too.

All of this goes to show that expertise does count for something. Not everyone is an interchangeable parts for the function of the machine. You wouldn’t put Little League umpires in the middle of calling a World Series, so why anyone would think a small college football ref could seamlessly weave themselves into calling an NFL game, would be beyond comprehension unless one understands modern business practices in this globalized world. Maybe the best thing that can happened from Tate Golden’s illegitimate catch is reaffirming the faith knowing what you are doing still counts for something.

New Constitution Party Newsletter Now Available

Below is a Constitution Party e-mail:

Dear Constitution Party Supporters and Friends,

Issue #10 of the national newsletter Constitution Party News at a Glance  is available on our website. Don’t miss an important message from me and updates from the Goode/Clymer campaign.

Frank Fluckiger
National Chairman

Note: Pay particular attention to the argument for voting third party made by CP National Chairman Frank Fluckiger at the bottom of the page.

Cross posted at IPR.

Goode/Clymer Campaign Material Now Available

Below is an e-mail from the Constitution Party:
Are you preparing to campaign in your neighborhood, precinct, community and/or across your state for the Constitution Party’s Goode/Clymer Presidential ticket?  Regardless of whether the Goode/Clymer ticket is on the ballot or a write-in option in your state, you should be planning now to get the word out to voters in your state that they have a far superior choice to “Romneycare” or “Obamanation” in 2012 with Virgil Goode for President and Jim Clymer for Vice-President.
Your “army” of supporters is not expected to enter this campaign “battle” unarmed.  First class campaign materials are available!  The palm card, slim jim, push card (call it what you will) shown below (editor’s note: actually not because I didn’t want to cut and paste an image) ) is available to those who are willing to get out and distribute them to voters in your precinct, district, region and or state.  These beautiful and effective two-sided glossy, hardstock pieces can be used for door to door campaigning, public events,  mailings or in any other way you might imagine.
Also available are very attractive blue and white “plastic bag” style Goode/Clymer yard signs, bumper stickers, round Goode/Clymer stickers and campaign buttons. (Supplies are limited)
Virgil Goode is receiving more media attention at the national and local level than any Presidential nominee in the history of the Constitution Party.  People are hearing about him and his campaign for President.  The literature you distribute; the sign you put on your lawn, or the bumper sticker you place on your car may well be the “connector” that reminds a voter that the great candidate he or she saw on TV, heard on the radio or read about in the newspaper or on the Internet is available for him or her to vote for…for President of these United States. In other words, it can make a difference!
Politics is all about OUTREACH.  These excellent campaign materials will help you reach the voters in your precinct, neighborhood, community, region and state with the Goode/Clymer message.  Considering the competition, that may be all it takes to win votes in your area the Goode/Clymer ticket.
Please contact the Constitution Party office at: 717-808-2138 (ask for Gary Odom) or to order materials.

Human Rights vs. The Right

So Takimag still has some interesting pieces from time to time, including this one from Nicholas Farrell:

One of the reasons the West is in such deep trouble is that it has allowed “rights” to kill off what’s “right,” as in “that which is right.” 

Rights are used to justify a whole series of wrongs, from the declaration of unwise or unjust wars to the condemnation of smokers to a life on the streets.

Read more…

It was ALL about slavery

Unemployment is still terrible, but there’s still plenty of work in historical revisionism. Here’s the latest on the ongoing reinterpretation of the War Between the States, or the Civil War, I mean, The War to Free the Slaves. Courtesy of the Huffington Post:

Issued 150 years ago this week, President Abraham Lincoln’s initial proclamation that he would free the South’s slaves is enjoying a public showcase to match its increased profile among scholars.

Lincoln released his lesser-known preliminary Emancipation Proclamation on Sept. 22, 1862 – 100 days before the final version. The first of the two documents has gained importance among historians as a turning point in the Civil War because of a change in thinking over the past 50 years.

Not that long ago, historians would explain the conflict in terms of clashing economic interests, States’ Rights, and different views of the Constitution. They acknowledged that slavery was an issue, but was not Lincoln’s or the North’s primary motivation. Historians would point to Lincoln’s own statement that if he could keep the South in the Union with slavery, he would do so. Historians would also refer to Congress’ July 22, 1861 “Joint Resolution on the War,” that proclaimed:

Resolved: . . . That this war is not being prosecuted upon our part in any spirit of oppression, nor for any purpose of conquest or subjugation, nor purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established institutions of those states, but to defend and maintain the supremacy of the Constitution and all laws made in pursuance thereof and to preserve the Union, with all the dignity, equality and rights of the several states unimpaired; and that as soon as these objects are accomplished the war ought to cease.

Then there was the Corwin Amendment, which Lincoln supported, that would deprive Congress of the power to “abolish or interfere” with slavery. That effort to keep the South in the Union failed, however.

Apparently, the people who lived and fought and wrote history during and the decades after the WBTS didn’t know what they were doing.

So why do court historians scholars now say that slavery was central to the war? Here’s what the Huffington Post article says about that:

Slavery and its abolition were once treated by historians as minor parts of the story behind the Civil War, but that began to change after the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s, said historian Edward Ayers, president of the University of Richmond. Since then, the steps that led to emancipation have been recognized for their importance – with the Sept. 22 proclamation being a prime example.

“All our thinking about this has undergone remarkable recasting over the last 50 years,” Ayers said. “People begin now with slavery as the fundamental fact and emancipation and less with union as being the sole focus of attention.”

So, it was the Civil Rights Revolution that caused this “remarkable recasting” of the cause of the WBTS. And as regular readers of this blog are aware, DC promoted that cultural and political revolution to advance its aggressive foreign policy: By repackaging DC as the great liberator of blacks in the 19th century and the present day, DC was able to counter the USSR’s “African Socialism” initiative during the Cold War.

And of course, all who serve the Empire today, from Pentagon employees to court historians, continue to peddle the myth: Bush took oil-rich Iraq in the name of “liberating” that lucky country.

Bottom line: The Civil War was the first war in history NOT about power or money, but doing good deeds for others. Guess that’s what makes America “exceptional.”

Why vote for Obama?

Because a Romney win will lull rank-and-file conservatives to sleep, that’s why. And when Romney implements policies that would rile voters if Obama did them, people will shrug and accept Romney’s acts as “moderate” compromises.

Who says Romney will enact Obama’s agenda? Willard himself says so:

The GOP nominee ratcheted up advertising in Latino markets, addressed the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and appeared on the leading Spanish-language networks, Univision and Telemundo.

He caught skeptics’ attention when he spoke of immigration in ways that appeared at odds with some of the statements he made during the primaries, including suggesting he’d support the Dream Act – which would give a path to citizenship for those who immigrated as children and attend college or serve in the military – after previously saying he’d veto the measure.

“Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain,” says the Willard of Oz. “I’m a severe conservative!”

Tuesday’s Gone with the Wind

No greater Americana legend in music then Ronnie Van Zant, has been trampled on.  With only one remaining member who ever played a recorded lick on a track or two, Lynyrd Skynyrd has decided to drop the Confederate flag as part of their aesthetic.

On the strength of Atlanta music scene indie heroes, Drive By Trucker’s, Southern Rock Opera, all got a fuller picture of the legend:

Now Ronnie and Neil became good friends their feud was just in song
Skynyrd was a bunch of Neil Young fans and Neil he loved that song
So He wrote “Powderfinger” for Skynyrd to record
But Ronnie ended up singing “Sweet Home Alabama” to the lord

And Neil helped carry Ronnie in his casket to the ground
And to my way of thinking, us southern men need both of them around

-”Ronnie and Neil”, Drive By Truckers

In the glam rock scene, there is much discussion, all negative, about the multiple acts using the same name–there are two Great Whites, and two LA Guns touring right now, for example.  And Axl takes a load of heat for still using the Guns N Roses name, even though he is the only one left–Axl who once covered himself in the Confederate flag to sing the Midwest isolationist anthem, “Civil War”, and one who lost a relative in the late Unpleasantness that seemed to play on his mind.

But whatever have we done, to live long enough, to see the great Lynyrd Skynyrd bastardized by the corporate manager, attempting to promote an album with of all titles, “Last of a Dyin’ Breed”?

Neil Young helped lower the coffin into the ground.

H/T AmRen


Why Do We Have All These Embassies Anyway?

This is a Facebook post from Kevin Gutzman. It’s a good question.

When James Madison was president, the USA had embassies in a handful of foreign countries. During the Cold War, it put them in basically every country in furtherance of a worldwide anti-Communist campaign. Today, it still has embassies virtually everywhere.

There are two major forces in human history: boredom and inertia. This is a manifestation of the latter. The country can’t afford all of these embassies, and they don’t do any good.

Hail, Leviathan!

Today’s Charlotte Observer features two op-eds that perfectly sum up the Empire.

In an article entitled Capitalism and government are friends, not competitors, Alex Marshall, a senior fellow at the Regional Plan Association in New York (naturally!), argues that government projects, from the Erie Canal to high-speed trains, have been vital to America’s economy:

We can stop talking about markets versus government, and start talking about what markets we want. In a democracy, if we understand that government creates markets, it means that we – the people – shape them. And our candidates should tell us how they would shape them….

Government doesn’t just change the light bulbs in the arena that private businesses operate in. It designed the whole stadium. This election is about acknowledging this, or remaining willfully in the dark.

Well, that’s as in-your-face as GovCo can get, isn’t it? Forget free enterprise; those superior beings who have emerged from the laissez-faire darkness understand that big government is the fount of all good things.

So the natural response to, “How big should government be?” is, “How many good things do you want?”

The other op-ed featured in today’s Obseerver argues for even more imperial intervention in the Middle East. Be sure to catch the Hobbesian argument that all social and political order emanates from Leviathan:

Those of us with roots in the Middle East appreciate America’s support and sacrifices. Like many of you, we are asking ourselves: Why would Stevens be attacked when it was America that helped save Benghazi from destruction at the hands of Muammar Gadhafi?

The answer is that the vacuum created by relatively weak central governments in places such as Libya makes it easier for extremist elements to attempt to exert their will. Only continued strong diplomatic and humanitarian engagement and support by the United States will thwart those forces.

The author has called for a US-backed no-fly zone in Syria, and for the US to supply arms to the Syrian rebels.

Leviathan is always ready for another war.

Also notice the assumption that “relatively weak central governments” are good for nothing but breeding “extremist elements.” Makes you wonder why Switzerland isn’t overrun with violence, doesn’t it?

Is Obama a Homosexual?

Is Obama a Homosexual?

John Craig, Just Not Said

When I first heard a few days ago that Obama might be gay, my initial reaction was, that’s ridiculous. He’s married, has two kids, and he’s never set off my gaydar. I had read a few years ago about Larry Sinclair, who claimed he had given Obama oral sex when Obama was a state senator. But at the time I just figured that any famous person is bound to attract a few loonies who will say anything to get publicity.

But after I read the article linked two posts ago (and directly below), I started reading more about Obama’s gayness, and after a while, it just made too much sense not to be true.

In his article in, Jerome Corsi, a Harvard Ph.D. in political science, said that Obama (along with Rahm Emanuel) was a lifetime member of Man’s Country, a gay bathhouse in Chicago. Obama was evidently well known there and many of the older clientele remembered him:

Investigative journalist Wayne Madsen, who worked with the National Security Agency from 1984 to 1988 as a Navy intelligence analyst, confirmed DuJan’s claims.

“It is common knowledge in the Chicago gay community that Obama actively visited the gay bars and bathhouses in Chicago while he was an Illinois state senator,” Madsen told WND.

[Continue reading....]


HT: American Renaissance

Ron Paul on the Libya Fiasco

Here is Ron Paul’s take on the fiasco in Libya. This man is so wise. Too bad GOP primary voters didn’t see it that way.

The attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya and the killing of the U.S. ambassador and several aides is another tragic example of how our interventionist foreign policy undermines our national security. The more the U.S. tries to control the rest of the world, either by democracy promotion, aid to foreign governments, or by bombs, the more events spin out of control into chaos, unintended consequences, and blowback…

…There is danger in the belief we can remake the world by bribing some countries and bombing others. But that is precisely what the interventionists – be they liberal or conservative – seem to believe. When the world does not conform to their image, they seem genuinely shocked. The secretary of state’s reaction to the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was one of confusion. “How could this happen in a country we helped liberate, in a city we helped save from destruction,” she asked.

Read more…

Reminder: Virgil Goode Constitution Day Money Bomb is Tomorrow

Below is from an e-mail from the Goode campaign:

Reminder: On Constitution Day, Monday September 17th, the Campaign is having a money bomb. Our goal is to raise 100,000 dollars in 24 hours.  Please sign up here:
and help spread the word. 

Note: I have expressed my concerns about Virgil Goode’s past history of support for interventionism. I do think he has made progress in the right direction, but I am supporting the Constitution Party nominee more as an endorsement of the idea of the Constitution Party – a constitutionalist, paleoish party to the right of the Republican Party – than as an endorsement of Goode himself.

On Christian Cultural Marxism. Russell Moore and other Useful Idiots.

jim-jones-rainbow-familyOn Christian Cultural Marxism. Russell Moore and other Useful Idiots.

By Walter Everly (reprinted from Invetors’ News)

During the recent debates surrounding the firing of John Derbyshire from National Review for writing the politically incorrect truth that everyone knows to be true, many people began to notice what others had noticed for a long time:  the function of Conservativism Inc. (i.e. mainstream “conservatism”) is not to battle the left but to police the real right.

On a recent email list, this line of thought got people to thinking:  perhaps the same is true for Conservative Christianity Inc. (i.e. mainstream “conservative” Christianity).  Perhaps the purpose of Conservative Christianity Inc. is not to battle the left but to silence and mislead conservative Christians. What’s most notable is that many so-called conservative Christian leaders today peddle what is essentially Cultural Marxism repackaged as “Christianity,” and the sheeple uncritically consume it.

While the candidates for such sinister work are many (neocon Timothy Dolan, John Piper, Richard LandLeith Anderson, et al.), here I will focus on Russell D. Moore, Dean of the School of Theology and Senior Vice President for Academic Administration at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (SBTS), since many conservatives have been criticizing him recently, and,  most importantly, since The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary is supposed to be one of the more conservative Baptist seminaries in the USA.

Where to begin?  Much could be said about Russell Moore’s subtle anti-Western assumptions, but here I’ll  focus on some of his more egregious positions.

1)  On the issue of immigration, “Russell Moore has sided with the Third World and against the West,” as others have noted.  Moore openly supports the Third World invasion of Western countries, esp. the USA.  Employing the censorship methods of Cultural Marxists, Moore thinks that discussions should be prohibited that relate to immigrants driving down American wages or immigrants draining social services. Moore has gone so far as to write a resolution criticizing European Americans who oppose their own dispossession from the  institutions their ancestors built.   The conservative Christian blog the Dow Blog has published extensively how Moore’s position resembles not traditional Christianity but Cultural Marxism, a stated purpose of which is the dispossession of Europeans worldwide.  See Pt. I, Pt. II, Pt. III.  (Patrick Cleburne comments here, here, here, and here.)

2) A second facet of Moore’s Cultural Marxism is his fanatical support of transracial adoption (vide Adopted for Life: The Priority of Adoption for Christian Families & Churches), which in essence tells Westerners to forsake their own inclusive fitness for the sake of non-Westerners.   When Part Robertson sensibly stated, “You do not have to take on somebody else’s problems,” implicitly criticizing all the nutjob multicult Christians running off to Africa or Haiti to adopt black children, Moore went into crybaby PC meltdown.  Here, Moore doesn’t even conceal his own pathetic ethnomasochism.  As implied by conservative Christian blogger Generation5 (here and here), Moore’s fanatical support of transracial adoption is a betrayal of traditional Christian realism and a championing of Cultural Marxism.

3) Another recent example of Moore’s Cultural Marxism is his opposition to laws opposing the Islamification of Western countries. This is what Louis Pauwels has called “Mental AIDS,” where, as with real AIDS  one’s body cannot distinguish between what’s beneficial and harmful, infected Christians do not oppose a religion that clearly seeks to replace Christianity.

4) The list could go on and on.  For instance, Moore seems to support the Cultural Marxist line that “race is unimportant,” although traditional Christianity always recognized racial differences and thought race mattered. Nonetheless, Moore is quick to label his opponents with the Cultural Marxist charge of “racism.” More recently, people who follow Moore’s Twitter feed told me that Moore has been going on rants about “white supremacist Darwinists.” Moore must subscribe to Trotskyite Lysenkoism? Or Liberal Creationism? In reality,  from what I can see, most of the anti-Moore criticism seems to come from conservative Christians.  On Twitter recently Moore has even gone so far as to invite the radical black-liberation preacher CJ Rhodes to visit SBTS (with free room and board!) and suggested to him that he get a degree at SBTS with a focus in “black church.”  What about white church, Russ?  What about Pro-Western Christianity?  Oh yea, ethnomasochism.  The now left-wing SBTS must be going the way of Jeremiah Wright!

Of course, all of this does not mean that Moore is a conscious Cultural Marxist; he probably has never even read anything written by Cultural Marxists.  Rather, Moore has probably imbibed Cultural Marxist ideas from popular culture and has then repackaged them as Christian.

People on an email list have suggested that Moore might suffer from pathological altruism, ethnomasochism, or pathetic beta maleness.  People in the field of theology have told me that Moore isn’t the brightest person, so, regardless of his condition, I suspect he’s uncritically repackaging Cultural Marxist platitudes as Christian, which raises the bigger question:  Why is someone so grossly incompetent the Dean of the School of Theology at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary?

The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, moving in the direction of the Rainbow Coalition, no longer seems to be a beacon of traditional Baptist Christianity it once was and the truly devout should be weary about studying there.


Russell Moore has really been drinking the Cultural Marxist Kool-Aid.  He seems to have mistaken Cultural Marxism for traditional Christianity.  Poor guy.  Here’s a recent tweet referring to this article as “white supremacist, hyper-Darwinist, anti-orphan eugenics propaganda” and another referring to it as being promoted  by a “group of white supremacist eugenicists.”  Moore here is deliberately trying to mislead his followers, since, as I noted previously, most of the anti-Moore criticism comes from conservative Christians. Seriously, Russ, take a deep breath, stop with the maudlin hyperventilation, watch this video (everyone’s talking about it), purify your mind of all the politically correct clichés that you’ve imbibed from Cultural Marxism, and at least try to be rational.  *Yawn*


Articles emailed by a reader:

Religious perspective:

James Edwards: “A Biblical Perspective on Immigration Policy

Generation5: “Reconsidering Interracial Adoption

Nil Desperandum: “Bloodlines: John Piper’s Assault on the Hereditary Family

Nil Desperandum: “A Response to Dr. Moore’s Opinions on Immigration and Race

David Opperman: “A Defense of Traditional Christianity

Secular Perspective:

Steven A Camarota: “74.7% of Mexican immigrants use some form of welfare in the USA” and “Legal and Illegal Immigration Driving Down American Wages

Peter Dodds: “International Adoption: In Whose Best Interest?

Steve Sailer: “Where Dawkins Fears To Tread: Ethnic Nepotism And The Reality Of Race

Frank Salter: “Estimating Ethnic Genetic Interests: Is It Adaptive to Resist Replacement Migration?”

Jared Taylor: “Pathological Altruism