tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post2812715972308124467..comments2024-01-26T00:52:04.340-08:00Comments on SBPDL: Ohio: Pre-1965 Immigration Act Population, With Cities Engulfed in Black-on-Black (And Random White) MayhemStuff Black People Don't Likehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07923871032509110194noreply@blogger.comBlogger78125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-65642424557388972682013-10-24T02:28:08.419-07:002013-10-24T02:28:08.419-07:00"Even if WMO agrees, I will still not pass on...<i>"Even if WMO agrees, I will still not pass on the data. We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it"?<br /><br />Is that science?</i><br /><br />No, it's the same game being played by those allegedly interested in the data: politics. Why shouldn't Jones play politics, when the other side isn't practicing science?<br /><br /><i>Did he not also refuse to release his methodology?</i><br /><br />Methodology is published in the papers. What the "skeptics" were demanding wasn't methodology, but working computer code. My understanding is that code is written as needed and generally discarded; it is not published with the results, and confirming the work would use original code in any case. That's just how they do things.<br /><br />That is light-years away from my world, where every line of code is vetted for conformance to a requirements document. But academia does things its own way. NASA actually did things both ways with the Space Shuttle flight computers; the Shuttle carried two independently-written and verified programs to avoid common logic bugs.Mr. Rationalnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-32356920429528416502013-10-24T02:26:53.814-07:002013-10-24T02:26:53.814-07:00Ah yes, the Chicken Little argument. Let's tra...<i>Ah yes, the Chicken Little argument. Let's trash the global economy just in case.</i><br /><br />That is not a counter-argument, it's name-calling. And speaking of trashing the economy, do you recall what the Dust Bowl drought did to the economy of the lower Midwest? Texas and Oklahoma had mass exodi.<br /><br /><i>even if AGW were a real phenomenon, which it's not</i><br /><br />You, who I would wager a 3-figure sum have never calculated an adiabatic temperature lapse rate, assert on the basis of nothing that AGW is not a real phenomenon?<br /><br /><i>there's nothing meaningful we can do about it.</i><br /><br />And then you assert a contradiction! If it's anthropogenic, it's caused by something humans are doing. OF COURSE we can do something about it, just by doing something different. It is literally that simple.<br /><br /><i>anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions are less than 5% of the total sources of carbon dioxide entering the atmosphere.</i><br /><br />No, they're not. Net additions to atmospheric carbon are almost entirely from fossil fuels; one look at the Keeling curve is enough to prove that the annual CO2 rise is closer to a fifth of the seasonal cycle than a twentieth. And as I said before, we KNOW that this is from human activity, because the ratio of carbon-13 in the new CO2 is too low for volcanoes.<br /><br />All of this can be verified with a few searches, but you won't do it. The spirit of open and honest inquiry has fled you, if you ever had it in the first place.<br /><br /><i>So to have any meaningful effect on the CO2 flux we would have to take absolutely Draconian measures. Not just to curtail hydrocarbon fuel use but to micromanage agriculture and land use across the entire globe.</i><br /><br />Nonsense. In the 1970's the USA was on course to eliminate coal-burning electric plants, which (spread to Europe as well) would have done half the job right there. <a href="http://www.phyast.pitt.edu/~blc/book/chapter9.html" rel="nofollow">The process was derailed by government under the guise of "safety"</a>. Refusing to admit China to the WTO would have kept its economy small, and coal consumption with it. Last, just refusing to buy timber or products from countries which clear rainforest or drain peat bogs would halt most of the ag-related emissions. We don't get anything from SE Asia that can't be obtained elsewhere, it's no hardship at all.<br /><br /><i>nothing you couldn't get done with a totalitarian New World Order and global government, right?</i><br /><br />Nothing you couldn't get done with cost-benefit analysis forced on the NRC and modest oil import and coal severance taxes.Mr. Rationalnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-19828180867553010122013-10-20T01:26:10.816-07:002013-10-20T01:26:10.816-07:00Mr. Rational said...
Analog Man repeats a canard:...Mr. Rational said...<br /><br /><i>Analog Man repeats a canard:<br /><br />You may have read how the CRU refused to release its data for others to check their results</i><br /><br />How is that a canard? <a href="http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/07/24/uk-met-office-and-dr-phil-jones-pay-no-attention-to-that-man-behind-the-curtain/" rel="nofollow">Did Dr Phil Jones, or did he not</a>, say<br /><br /><i>"Even if WMO agrees, I will still not pass on the data. We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it"?</i><br /><br />Is that science?<br /><br />Did he not also refuse to release his methodology? Understandable, since he apparently doesn't have a record of the methodology used. Or, does that also belong to someone else?AnalogMannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-20596254675286266442013-10-19T22:20:33.699-07:002013-10-19T22:20:33.699-07:00Mr. Rational
Unlike you, I would start taking acti...<i>Mr. Rational<br />Unlike you, I would start taking action when the probability of serious adverse climate change hit 5%, or even 1% if I could do it on the cheap. We passed 5% a long, long time ago; we're up somewhere around the 95% confidence level.</i><br /><br />Ah yes, the Chicken Little argument. Let's trash the global economy just in case.<br /><br />Among the many glaring flaws in the entire ridiculous edifice is that even if AGW were a real phenomenon, which it's not, there's nothing meaningful we can do about it.<br /><br />How's that? Well, anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions are less than 5% of the total sources of carbon dioxide entering the atmosphere. So to have any meaningful effect on the CO2 flux we would have to take absolutely Draconian measures. Not just to curtail hydrocarbon fuel use but to micromanage agriculture and land use across the entire globe. Hey, nothing you couldn't get done with a totalitarian New World Order and global government, right?<br /><br />So it's just as well AGW is fiction.<br /><br />I remember when I used to wonder how medieval clergy could be so stupid as to debate the number of angels that could fit on the head of a pin.<br /><br />I also remember when I used to wonder how Rome could have fallen.<br /><br />It's all so clear now.Chuck Hammernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-82149135120230399752013-10-19T19:58:09.265-07:002013-10-19T19:58:09.265-07:00**sigh**
To get back to the actual post has anyone...**sigh**<br />To get back to the actual post has anyone seen the movie "Flag wars"? It is about how a bunch of gays wanted to come into a Columbus neighborhood and rehab/clean up the area. This 'hood was already populated with "low income" (read: blacks) people and it showed the war that played out between the two groups. You have to see this movie. Being from Columbus I can tell you that the blacks eventually won, as most of this area is still ghetto. The gays moved on to other areas. But this movie shows an important truth...blacks HATE gays. If you want to isolate your neighborhood from a black invasion, get and sustain a sizable gay population. It has worked out GREAT for certain parts of Columbus, which is now actually experiencing a white INflux from the outer suburbs.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-73865244099311855742013-10-19T11:04:08.775-07:002013-10-19T11:04:08.775-07:00And back to Chuck Hammer again:
False analogies. ...And back to Chuck Hammer again:<br /><br /><i>False analogies. Global climate is vastly more complex than any of your examples.</i><br /><br />More complex than entire stars? How would you know? Does the word "helioseismology" even mean anything to you?<br /><br /><i>The only truly honest approach to climate science is to say it's too complicated to be able to know "the answer."</i><br /><br />The IPCC reports don't even try to state "the answer", but probability projections. You know, like the probablistic projections of likelihood of damaging weather events which let your insurance company quote a premium for coverage against wind, hail and tornadoes?<br /><br /><i>Instead of which what we get from the high priests of warming is "consensus,"</i><br /><br />About the confidence limits, yes. I've tried to read some of these reports (they're very heavy going).<br /><br />Unlike you, I would start taking action when the probability of serious adverse climate change hit 5%, or even 1% if I could do it on the cheap. We passed 5% a long, long time ago; we're up somewhere around the 95% confidence level.<br /><br />It's actually pretty easy to test the greenhouse model. Just measure the thermal infrared radiation coming down from the atmosphere. Measure it at sea level, on mountains, when the air is dry, when it's humid, day and night. Measure radiation coming up at ground level, and over the same terrain from high altitude. Do you think this hasn't been done? If you do, you're wrong. AND crazy.<br /><br />Now, if you could just get your head around these concepts you might (<i>might</i>) be able to use them against the blank-slatists. As a for-instance:<br />1. What's the likelihood that behavioral differences between dog breeds, chimpanzees vs. bonobos, etc. are innate rather than environmental?<br />2. What's the likelihood that differences in behavior between human races are also innate?<br />3. How much of a chance of this should there be before we take it seriously in criminal justice? In educational policy? In welfare policy? In immigration policy?<br /><br />You really need to read <a href="http://decarbonisesa.com/2013/10/10/the-most-inconvenient-of-truths/" rel="nofollow">this</a>, where the author says "Career number two was coming unglued under the weight of cognitive dissonance." Who knows, you might be able to recruit some new racists!Mr. Rationalnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-11339041539358064942013-10-19T11:02:21.905-07:002013-10-19T11:02:21.905-07:00And Robert B chimed in:
Okay you people, repeat a...And Robert B chimed in:<br /><br /><i>Okay you people, repeat after me, "there is no global warming". Jeezus, they got 5 feet of snow in the Black Hills last week and it's going to snow this weekend in Minneapolis.</i><br /><br />How do you think 5 feet of snow got there? The air was full of water! How did it carry all of that water? It was WARM (relatively speaking). Why is the center of Antarctica a desert, with less than 1 inch of precipitation per year? Because it's COLD and COLD air doesn't carry water worth a fig.<br /><br /><i>Have you all no clue as to what it was about? Did none of you ever even look at the Kyoto Protocol?</i><br /><br />Have you no clue about READING ENGLISH? <a href="http://stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-killing-zones-indianapolis-star.html?showComment=1382106626502#c5254143499819647640" rel="nofollow">The left believes the science, but the policy prescriptions are non-sequiturs</a>.<br /><br /><i>Mr. Rational also believes in giant Chinese Junks circumnavigating the globe</i><br /><br />Hah! Hardly, not without magnetic compasses! They were technically capable of reaching the east coast of Africa, and the claims that they did so had some credibility with me. I'm not a historian so I can't judge the counter-claim that this is modern pro-Chinese propaganda. Not a big deal either way.Mr. Rationalnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-10387578748812729982013-10-19T11:01:17.271-07:002013-10-19T11:01:17.271-07:00Analog Man repeats a canard:
You may have read ho...Analog Man repeats a canard:<br /><br /><i>You may have read how the CRU refused to release its data for others to check their results</i><br /><br />The CRU at East Anglia <b>didn't own a lot of the data they used, so they couldn't give it out</b>. It was the proprietary property of the countries which captured it (yes, some countries consider weather records to be national property or even secrets). The skeptics could either purchase the data or try to get it free under NDA. Have you noticed them doing this? No, they're all screaming "CRU WON'T SHARE (what isn't) THEIR DATA!" (The Koch-financed Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project had no difficulties there. It also came up with the "hockey stick" just like Mann.) There is no science on the side of the "skeptics". None whatsoever.Mr. Rationalnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-33486780145100836942013-10-19T10:43:59.501-07:002013-10-19T10:43:59.501-07:00@Robert B
You never know, the life you don't s...@Robert B<br /><i>You never know, the life you don't save may have been the one who might have raped your mother.</i><br /><br />The un-PC humor on this website is superb. <br /><br /><i>You see, the real problem here, when one analyzes the stats in the article, is that the blacks just can't aim a gun worth a shit. They are not getting kill shots and the silly doctors are able to save too many of them. If they had better control and better aim, more of them would succumb to the first shot. That's where white mentoring comes in. Whites can teach them better control and they will thus get better kill rates.</i><br /><br />Here's the problem with this. When there are more men than women, men have to compete to attract women. When there are more women than men, women have to compete to attract men. This logic is unassailable; ask any poor Chinese man in the one-child PRC how his marriage prospects are going. <br /><br />Because of the murder and incarceration rate among AA men, basically 1/3rd are unavailable to AA women, either b/c they are in prison, jail, or dead/crippled. This means basically 100 women for 60 men, which means that the women have to offer sex (what else do they have?) to attract men, and the men can secure sex easily.<br /><br />If you want to control the breeding of another generation of poor impulse control AAs, you need to find a way to reduce the female population below the male one, so men have to compete for women. The system at present makes the problem worse: one man can fertilize 100 women, but 100 men are limited to the reproduction of the one woman in their midst.<br /><br />I don't have a solution, but I think it's important to point out that increasing the kill ratio will make the problem WORSE.Ex-Brooklynitenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-971867379880824822013-10-19T10:33:05.119-07:002013-10-19T10:33:05.119-07:0099% of climate scientists are in agreement. If you...<i>99% of climate scientists are in agreement. If you don't want to believe, then go sail off the end of the earth. ...<br /><br />So go ahead, refuse to believe science... </i><br /><br />"Science" needs to follow disinterested inquiry, based on the data, wherever it leads. It is formally interested in truth, and a scientist who falsifies data is no longer a scientist. I think we can all agree on that.<br /><br />Politicians start with a theory and look to find support for it, or at least destroy the opposition to it. This mentality is a different syndrome (not all bad, btw) from science. The problem is, most of "science" has been funded by politicians, with decisions by funders made on a political basis. This corrupts the disinterested search for data, wherever it may lie, and forces the investigators to look in the fields where the government lighting is, not where they lost their metaphorical keys.<br /><br />So, you wind up using "voting" mechanisms like "99% of X say something" instead of weighing mechanisms.<br /><br />The irony is, I do not believe in anthropogenic global warming (which is now called "climate change," since there is no warming for years), but I also think that spewing excess carbon into the atmosphere is an uncontrolled scientific experiment, and thus the epitome of bad science.Ex-Brooklynitenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-82924176821334989712013-10-19T06:33:58.072-07:002013-10-19T06:33:58.072-07:00Thwy speak standard english too. Amazing than imig...Thwy speak standard english too. Amazing than imigrant africans speak better english than AA's taught in American schools!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-79106923263483671672013-10-18T23:43:46.181-07:002013-10-18T23:43:46.181-07:00Damn, you guys are on fire today. Some great comme...Damn, you guys are on fire today. Some great comments - too many of which are anonymous. Get a handle, guys, so we can tell who's who.<br /><br />@ Anon 1:09 -<br /><br /><i>99% of climate scientists are in agreement. If you don't want to believe, then go sail off the end of the earth.</i><br /><br />Actually, I have considered that very seriously, but life got in the way.<br /><br />Oh, my. 99%. We have a consensus. The science is settled. You must Believe to be Saved. And if you do not Believe, you will be banished to Outer Darkness. Can you see how your behaviour resembles nothing more than a cult? It cries out for refutation, and Chuck Hammer, Robert B et al have ably done so. Also...<br /><br />Anon 1:54 (thanks for the support) makes the excellent point that<br /><br /><i>Building computer models is no substitute, either,</i><br /><br />Models serve the purpose of testing hypotheses by making predictions which can be confirmed. Unfortunately for the "climate scientists" (the ninety and nine percent) their predictions have failed spectacularly. But wait, there's more!<br /><br />Some have mentioned the so-called "Climategate" scandal, where emails and other records of the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit were hacked and published, displaying those "climate scientists'" bad faith and dirty tricks. I found the records from their computer department more interesting.<br /><br />You may have read how the CRU refused to release its data for others to check their results (an absolutely anti-scientific attitude). Why should we give you our hard-won data, they said, when your intention is purely to prove our conclusions wrong? Well, because that's how science is done! Repeatability. Falsification.<br /><br />Climategate revealed a more prosaic reason. The CRU can't repeat its own results. They have no idea how they arrived at their published results. There are maintenance notes from an analyst who spent three years trying to figure out what the relevant program looked like at the time they ran it. Unsuccessfully.<br /><br />There are program listings that show an interesting detail. After all the number crunching, the program adds a "fudge factor" to each year's temperature. No explanation of the source of these factors. Possibly something calculated off-line from other source data, possibly a thumb-suck. The point is, these hardcoded fudge factors are an increasing series - each is larger than its predecessor. In other words, you could feed this model a series of identical temperatures, and it would spit out a hockey stick.<br /><br />Now, true believers like Mr Rational will point out that, just because the people hawking this sandwich are proven liars with ulterior motives and sloppy procedures, who don't consume their own product, that doesn't prove they're wrong. True enough; logic is a harsh master. But I know which way I'm betting.<br />AnalogMannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-57724461214300177242013-10-18T21:50:39.688-07:002013-10-18T21:50:39.688-07:00I haven't read all 88 comments, but obviously,...I haven't read all 88 comments, but obviously, the takeaway from the article is that whites will have to secede into some sort of homeland away from the black/brown menace... and THEN<br />defend it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-88325327783371702152013-10-18T19:43:09.697-07:002013-10-18T19:43:09.697-07:00@ Anon @ 6:44PM--
As a an 8th generation American...@ Anon @ 6:44PM--<br /><br />As a an 8th generation American (I'm only guessing at the Generations, but since 1634) I beg to disagree with you. My ancestors were the ones who conquered this continent and made it safe for all those who came much, much later. We built this country. Everyone else is merely a guest.Robert Bnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-55860602249351748802013-10-18T19:37:06.378-07:002013-10-18T19:37:06.378-07:00To Anon @ 2:12,
Great post. About 6 years ago the...To Anon @ 2:12,<br /><br />Great post. About 6 years ago the Minneapolis Star Tribune (affectionately known here as the "Star and Sickle"), Published a story on the Somalis here where they admitted that half of them are here illegally and entered via Canada. They also put the blame on them for more than 2,800 mugging per year. I actually had hope for the paper for a bit after that, but no, the article made waves, CAIR got excited and that was the last they did on the Somali problem. They are hated by everyone--especially American blacks. But that's okay with Somalis as they hate everyone else.Robert Bnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-61133857820519916972013-10-18T18:44:41.251-07:002013-10-18T18:44:41.251-07:00 We are the race of people that built this great ... We are the race of people that built this great country.<br /> Most of this great land has been built in the last 100 years.<br /> Irish, Italians, Polls, English, Germans, etc.<br /> If we can do this beautiful work, why is it we have to see it all go to waste.<br /> If we were able to succeed once, we will be able tosucceed again.<br /> WHITE ONLY HOMELANDAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-783964459732348982013-10-18T18:41:19.611-07:002013-10-18T18:41:19.611-07:00Robert B.
Have you all no clue as to what it was a...Robert B.<br /><i>Have you all no clue as to what it was about? Did none of you ever even look at the Kyoto Protocol? It was and remains all about taxing white people in the West (Russia would never sign onto it) in order to pay non-whites in the third world to NOT POLLUTE. Any body with a brain knows the third world are the filthiest places on the planet. It was all about GLOBAL WELFARE for non-whites.</i><br /><br />Indeed. BRA on a global scale. That plus all the cow-fart derivatives which can be marketed by the usual suspects (while they buy up CDS's and bet against them). <br /><br />SoCAL Snowman:<br /><i>It smells like a foot long submarine shit sandwich.</i><br /><br />...good-n-fresh, with crunchy kosher maggots on top. Yummy! Yummy, we be hohngry in our tummy! Just say the gubmint scientists' shahadah three times and you're ready to go: <br /><br /><i>There is no truth but warming, and AlGore is its profit!</i>Bogolyubskinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-78602178277675740302013-10-18T18:36:20.671-07:002013-10-18T18:36:20.671-07:00Thanks Johnny.
I have always seen the black on b...Thanks Johnny. <br /><br />I have always seen the black on black violence problem as a white problem. We need to help them out. Going to the sporting goods warehouse? Buy a box or two extra of ammo and "drop" it off in the ghetto--literally, just drop it on any street corner and it will find its way to a needy hoodie. Got an old .22 or .32 laying around from grandpa's day? It's most likely unregistered so, why not donate it to a thuggie in the hood? Just drop it on any street corner with a spare box of shells and there ya go--you've done your part to help end black on black crime. After all, if they just had enough guns and ammo, there wouldn't be any left to breed, now would there?Robert Bnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-40504781983244153842013-10-18T18:29:52.916-07:002013-10-18T18:29:52.916-07:00Remember, Mr. Rational also believes in giant Chin...Remember, Mr. Rational also believes in giant Chinese Junks circumnavigating the globe several hundred years before Magellan. The fact that every single historian of repute laughs at the notion, does not stop him from believing it. Mr. Rational? Hardly. Even wikipedia devotes massive space to debunking the idea of the Chinese--a people who still have to pay someone like the Russians to build ships for them, could circumnavigate the globe 700 years ago in their Junks. Robert Bnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-49896658449071359152013-10-18T18:22:50.258-07:002013-10-18T18:22:50.258-07:00HEY, Robert B that was great. Plus we have to teac...HEY, Robert B that was great. Plus we have to teach the thugs to stop turning there hand side ways.<br /> Remember the only real answer to all this shit, cause it will not get better. Is a WHITE ONLY HOMELAND. <br /> Just had to say that.....johnny j.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-62363287658286335052013-10-18T18:21:31.233-07:002013-10-18T18:21:31.233-07:00Okay you people, repeat after me, "there is n...Okay you people, repeat after me, "there is no global warming". Jeezus, they got 5 feet of snow in the Black Hills last week and it's going to snow this weekend in Minneapolis. The Japs and the Russians never signed on to it and now thousands are speaking out against it--thousands of scientists.<br /><br />Have you all no clue as to what it was about? Did none of you ever even look at the Kyoto Protocol? It was and remains all about taxing white people in the West (Russia would never sign onto it) in order to pay non-whites in the third world to NOT POLLUTE. Any body with a brain knows the third world are the filthiest places on the planet. It was all about GLOBAL WELFARE for non-whites. Damn, get a clue. The only thing more carbon dioxide does is make plants grow faster and greener. It isn't warming (it was far warmer in early Roman times than now and it was cooling that caused the crop failures that sent the "barbarians" on the move)you have to worry about, it's cooling. Cooling causes massive crop failures. How the hell do you think a blond King Tut ended up in Egypt? It's called an ice age.Robert Bnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-55578424847295127522013-10-18T18:03:58.842-07:002013-10-18T18:03:58.842-07:00Possibly there might be some food in the house if ...Possibly there might be some food in the house if stupid shit like Michael Jordan sneakers and 30" rims for the $200.00 hooptie were not purchased.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-74200103557062069252013-10-18T17:43:41.114-07:002013-10-18T17:43:41.114-07:00"American politicians, who can give any Khat-..."American politicians, who can give any Khat-chewing Somali pirate a run for his money in the insanity department, dumped thousands of Somalis into Lewiston, Maine "<br /><br />-Anon 2:12<br /><br />Perfect statement. I sometimes wonder - who is more insane: the liberals, or the ones taking advantage of the liberals?Pro-Civnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-24247534827916453742013-10-18T17:22:55.782-07:002013-10-18T17:22:55.782-07:00Well, the real lesson here is whites need to mento...Well, the real lesson here is whites need to mentor blacks--especially those in the inner city ghetto areas, but all of them really.<br /><br />You see, the real problem here, when one analyzes the stats in the article, is that the blacks just can't aim a gun worth a shit. They are not getting kill shots and the silly doctors are able to save too many of them. If they had better control and better aim, more of them would succumb to the first shot. That's where white mentoring comes in. Whites can teach them better control and they will thus get better kill rates.<br /><br />Now, all you red blooded white males who are into the shooting sports, get those street creds (and bonus points at work) by getting out there and getting into the "hood" and make a positive difference where these stats are concerned. You never know, the life you don't save may have been the one who might have raped your mother.Robert Bnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-38505230629448149742013-10-18T17:03:55.092-07:002013-10-18T17:03:55.092-07:00Mr. Clean said...
Jay Santos said: You have lots m...<i> Mr. Clean said...<br />Jay Santos said: You have lots more faith in those 330 million than I. They re-elected Obama and most will sit pasively slack jawed, provided the tele screen works and Taco Bell remains open.</i><br /><br />Here's nearly10,000 of those Americans you can count on to save the Republic:<br /><br /><i> Anonymous said...<br />http://abcnews.go.com/US/florida-orphans-appeal-prompts-10000-inquiries/story?id=20610902<br />Of the 10,000 families who want to adopt this 15yr old future-SBPDL-story, I'd be shocked if less than 9,500 of them were white.<br />"If you can, reach out and get me and love me until I die," Davion told ABC News.<br />Good God, he really has perfected the huckster routine. Sounds like a prison penpal. "Love me til the day I die"???? That's not asking for love, that's asking for a Sucker.</i><br /><br />My point is that something, at some time, destroyed a large swath of the American of European extraction. TV, squids, feminization, pot, fluoride, cheeseburgers, I don't pretend to know. But all the evidence indicates they will lay down for the slaughter, figuratively or literally.Jay Santoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18420239433379688282noreply@blogger.com