One more Super Tuesday piece.

George Gascon, the Soros-backed mass-murdering district attorney, was up against a slew of candidates looking to take him down. Gascon had to get over 50 percent of the vote to avoid a runoff in our “top two” primary system, and the friend to all rapists and murderers didn’t even come close.

Gascon managed 25.2 percent. That’s it. He got 369,854 votes. His two top challengers, who ran on “dump Gascon,” got a combined 428,529. Totaling the votes of every candidate who opposed Gascon, even the little fishes, you get 1,098,772.

1,098,772 against Gascon vs. 369,854 for him. Things look good for the November general.

So let’s examine how we’re gonna screw it up.

Conservative author Peachy Keenan is Fox’s favorite pseudonymous “mommy blogger.” She has a huge audience on TV and Twitter, and fans like Tucker Carlson and Mollie Hemingway.

Also, she’s dumb as a brick. And not one of those good bricks you can use as a bookend. One of those crumbly bricks that’d lose a fight with a plate-glass window.

Following Super Tuesday, Peachy posted an election map that went viral on rightist Twitter. The map appeared to show that, in the race to fill Dianne Feinstein’s Senate seat, only coastal California went blue. Everywhere else: red!

“Lives depend on this. If Gascon wins reelection, innocent people will die.”

“Perfect visual proof that Democrats are the party of out of touch coastal elites,” crowed Peachy. The rest of California went for Garvey; he’s a shoo-in for November!

Now, to be fair, Peachy didn’t create that map; she simply misrepresented it. It’s actually an NY Times interactive map detailing the total vote count for Garvey vs. his three Dem opponents: Schiff, Porter, and Lee. The screenshot posted by Peachy was just the Garvey vs. Schiff numbers, isolated. Almost all of those “red counties” go blue IF you count Garvey vs. the three Dems combined. For example, in red-leaning San Diego County, Garvey did beat Schiff, 205,139 to 163,178. But, if you add the votes for Porter and Lee, you get Garvey 205,139 to Schiff, Porter, and Lee’s combined 274,249.

To be clear, there are counties on that map that are truly red (Kern—27,310 for Garvey, 20,532 for all three Dems combined, Tulare—23,025 for Garvey, 15,995 for all three Dems…Garvey will win those counties easily in November). But by misrepresenting that map—by showing Garvey vs. Schiff without explaining that it was actually Garvey vs. three Dems and Garvey lost against the cumulative Dem vote in most of those “red” counties, Peachy’s not doing rightists any favors, because she’s just created a new MAGA vote-fraud myth that will endure for years.

If Gascon loses in November, Soros will not embarrass himself by claiming “voter fraud.” He and his equally evil son will recalibrate and attack again elsewhere. MAGAs, on the other hand…if Garvey loses in November, and honestly, it’s likely he will, MAGAs will use Peachy’s map as proof that the election was STOLLEN!

“Look at this map! It showed every inland county voted Garvey in the primary. There’s no way he could’ve lost in the general except for DEEP STATE FRAUD! Let’s storm Sacramento!”

You cannot show anything fake to MAGAs, because MAGAs believe everything they see (they’re the David St. Hubbins of politics). Their victimization worldview demands a constant flow of new proof that “they cheated us again!”

Peachy’s map will become part of MAGA lore should Garvey lose. It’ll fuel a new generation of Kari Lake fantasists.

Thanks, Peach.

Oh, and thanks for this, too. That whole “coastal elites” thing. Her fraudulently presented map makes it appear as though every part of Cali went red except for a narrow strip of “coastal elites.” And I might’ve been tolerant of such nonsense had it come from an outsider. But Peachy lives in L.A. County! The blue parts of that map only look “coastal” when viewed from space. In fact, that blue strip goes a hundred miles inland. The blue on the map only looks like a narrow strip because the map’s so zoomed out. Zoom in, and much of that blue is very far indeed from the beach. Very not “coastal,” and very not “elite.”

“Perfect visual proof that Democrats are the party of out of touch coastal elites”? So, South Central L.A. is “coastal elite”? Ladera Heights (64 percent black)? Inglewood (39 percent black)? Compton (25 percent black)?

Lancaster (21 percent black) is included in that blue strip. It’s 71 miles from any beach. If that makes it “coastal,” I’d hate to be a real estate agent there who’s asked by a prospective buyer, “Hey, show me the nearest beach trail!” Even some of the areas in the blue strip that are somewhat “coastal,” like Inglewood (6.7 miles from the beach) and Carson (23 percent black, seven miles from the beach), are hardly “elite.” Carson, home of Hustler Casino, liquor stores, and old ladies murdered by muggers while using their Hustler Casino winnings at liquor stores, is about as elite as my ass, and lemme tell you, my ass ain’t elite (even with the top hat I had tattooed on it in ’98).

Worse still, some of the actual coastal elite areas in Peachy’s map are politically quite red. Rolling Hills, which sits on the cliffs above the ocean in that blue strip (can’t get more “coastal” than that) has the third-highest median home value in the entire U.S. Not California, but the entire U.S. And it went for Trump in 2016 and 2020 (it’s only included in the blue strip because the map is of counties, not cities).

Like so many of today’s rightists—and this applies to the Fox talking heads, the MAGAs, and the alt-rightists—Peachy loves framing everything in the most simpleminded of terms:

The sh*libs control all of the nice places—the ones with beaches, trees, scenic hikes, perfect weather. Red state CA gets sunbaked wastes, meth farms, rubble, and smog.

This is such an idiotic statement, I don’t even know where to start. The truly red parts of this state include some of the most breathtaking rural, mountainous areas in the nation. Places that still have horse trails and parks with no homeless. Oh, and majority white residents. But like all Fox-approved yappers, Peachy don’t ever wanna mention race!

I often get slammed by rightists for talking down to them like children. And sure, I’m a bitter drunken scold. But I’ll never blow smoke up your ass. It’s the Fox and MAGA-approved “personalities” who actually treat you like children, by feeding you lies and then gloating about how you lap ’em up.

Like that Garvey/Schiff map. Peachy gloated, “2.1M views. This post brought us together.” As of now, it has 11.3 million views.

Yes, some of you do lap it up. But I ain’t the one serving it to you.

Okay, at this point you’re likely asking, “Dave, you bitter drunken scold, what’s the point? It seems like you’re just beating up on a popular but dim-witted rightist mommy blogger.”

Okay, here’s the third-act reveal of the “point.” And it has to do with how we might screw up an easy win against Gascon/Soros.

Here’s Peachy tweeting about that race on primary night: “This is the only race I care about. There’s a demon running LA county—and he’s winning LOL. Top 2 go to a runofff. Who’s Hochman? Another maniac?”

So she claims it’s “the only race she cares about,” but she hasn’t taken the five minutes needed to familiarize herself with Gascon’s main opponent? Hochman’s a tough-as-nails law & order former prosecutor. He’s the anti-Gascon. But Peachy prefers misrepresented maps to actual research (if you’d call finding out about Hochman “research.” I’d call it “within the grasp of a retarded lemur”).

Peachy ludicrously claimed that Gascon was “winning,” because she can’t do the simple math of comparing his votes to the cumulative votes of his opponents.

“LOL.”

Rightist influencers care not for details. You’re being spoon-fed by morons who are themselves spoon-fed because things like independent research and basic math are beyond them.

More than that, the simple-minded crap about California’s political geography—and how many times have I drunkenly scolded you guys about the right’s idiotic take on Beverly Hills (“It’s whur da left-wing culubrities dun live, gyuk-gyuk-gyuk)?—isn’t just stupid but harmful. Dismissing the areas that are friendly to your cause means (a) you won’t campaign where the fucking votes are, and (b) you won’t fundraise where the fucking MONEY is.

As I’ve said many times, north (red) Beverly Hills is your friend. Votes and money. Same thing with Rolling Hills. Votes and even more money. But people like Peachy—and, sorry to say, some of you—would rather insult the people who can help rather than accept the assistance they wish to give.

There are other nuances the simpletons ignore by clumsily painting everything red or blue in the first place. There are a great many parts of L.A. County that voted for Biden but rejected the last few Soros-backed pro-crime anarcho-tyranny ballot initiatives. Recognize that.

El Segundo, for example, my home for several years, is one of those beach cities Peachy dismisses as “coastal elite,” when in fact it’s a white enclave heavily comprised of people who work for the Chevron refinery for which the city’s named.

I’ve never thought of refinery workers as “elites,” but then again I don’t appear on Fox, either. So what do I know?

In fact, El Segundo is heavenly. One of the safest cities in the state, pristine beaches, community cookouts and fireworks in the massive Main Street park that has a half-dozen baseball diamonds and hot dog stands and no basketball courts. These are neither “elites” nor “shitlibs”; these are the whites the GOP should be courting, not alienating.

Yes, El Segundo went for Biden. Also yes, it went against the Dem-backed “no bail; criminals walk free” and “restore affirmative action” ballot initiatives. These residents are persuadables, and in down-ballot nonpartisan races, persuadables matter.

So how ’bout we don’t piss them off when something as important as defeating Soros is on the line?

Lives depend on this. If Gascon wins reelection, innocent people will die.

You don’t have to want to help, but Christ, don’t harm. Don’t spread fakes, don’t insult the communities where the money, the red voters, and the persuadables are. Learn about a race before tweeting about it. If you have a following, use it intelligently and not just for LULZ and viral frauds. You don’t even have to like L.A. or California. But a defeat for Soros here will help shift the momentum against him elsewhere. Gascon losing America’s most populous county to his polar opposite could turn the tide against the BLM/Floyd-inspired soft-on-crime insanity that, yes, even gripped certain “red” states.

There’s a difference between not helping and actively harming. All I ask is that you not do the latter in the Gascon race.

I know…I’m pissing in the wind.

Still, even a bitter drunken scold can dream.

Walking around my rapidly crumbling hometown, I have recently begun noticing a series of stickers displayed prominently upon lampposts, walls, and bus stops, depicting a large golden cannabis leaf and QR code smartphone users can scan to gain easy access to their friendly local neighborhood drug dealer. Apparently, such things have been appearing all over the U.K. of late—particularly outside schools, to get the kiddies hooked nice and young—but, as none of the ones in the area where I live have been removed by the authorities, despite being up for several weeks now, I can only presume the Great British police force don’t really care.

They are far too busy arresting white people for posting “dangerous” stickers on windows and bins instead, because, rather than doing something totally harmless like pushing illegal drugs to toddlers, these particular stickers do something much more harmful: They tell the truth about mass immigration.

“No such problems can ever occur as regards any corresponding items of pro-BLM graffiti, of course.”

Stick ’Em Up!
On 1 March, Sam Melia, a self-described “white advocate” from the English county of Yorkshire, who, in an act of rather futile resistance, maintained an online archive of downloadable anti-immigration stickers on his secret website, was handed a two-year sentence from a judge for the twin heinous crimes of “inciting racial hatred” and “encouraging racially aggravated criminal damage”—pro-white stickers take absolutely ages to remove from items of street furniture, you see. No such problems can ever occur as regards any corresponding items of pro-BLM graffiti, of course, which are allowed to remain in situ defacing our public sphere forever, because the West’s current ruling class just happens to approve of their overtly Caucasian-cursing message.

Mr. Melia is alleged to have been a former member of National Action, a tiny neo-Nazi group that is now banned in the U.K., unlike BLM, a gigantic neo-Marxist group that is perfectly legal. He is also said to have belonged to The Hundred Handers, an incredibly obscure micro-dot of an organization whose previous biggest claim to fame was posting up fake Extinction Rebellion (XR) stickers making parodically Green points like “MASS IMMIGRATION DESTROYS THE ENVIRONMENT” and “WHITE BRITS A MINORITY BY 2066: PRESERVE AN ENDANGERED SPECIES.”

Interestingly, XR themselves responded to this outrageous impersonation of their cause by saying that “Extinction Rebellion sticker templates, fonts and logos are freely online for anyone to use and in this instance it seems they have been used by a Far-Right group promoting hate-speech.” Given one of the main reasons Sam Melia got two years behind bars was because of the huge and colossal amounts of “criminal damage” that could be caused by his pathetic little labels being attached to items of public property, presumably XR activists were also arrested for facilitating identical offenses of glue injury against helpless street furniture?

Not really, because the British governing class rather approve of XR, which is why in November last year nine XR vandals were found “not guilty” [sic] of causing £500,000 worth of damage by smashing up a London bank’s windows with hammers, even though they clearly had done so, and proudly admitted to the fact in court. If Sam Melia himself had done the same thing to the windows of the Home Office whilst shouting, “SEND BACK LENNY HENRY!!!” he would have been immediately hanged.

Ah, but the bank immorally provided funding to fossil fuel companies during the midst of a so-called “climate emergency” in which the entire future of the human race was in imminent peril, you see—so, whilst ostensibly illegal, the XR vandals’ conduct was deemed morally justified nonetheless by an easily led activist jury.

The mainstream U.K. media reaction to this complete and utter legal disgrace was relatively muted. I wonder what the reaction would have been had a similar not-guilty verdict been returned in the Sam Melia “criminal damage” case from an equally easily swayed jury? After all, although placing small stickers upon council bin lids and park notice boards was also technically illegal, Sam had done so right in the middle of an “immigration emergency” in which the entire future of the white race was in imminent peril likewise, had he not?

Drop Your Stickers, Bend Over, and Take Your Punishment
What “hateful things” did the evil stickers in Sam Melia’s downloadable Pan-Aryan Panini album actually say? Combing through media reports, I find slogans like the following: “We will be a minority in our homeland by 2066,” “Reject white guilt,” “Stop anti-white rape gangs,” “Mass immigration is white genocide,” “Natives losing jobs, migrants pouring in,” “It’s OK to be white,” “Import the Third World, become the Third World,” “Second-generation? Third? Fourth? You [still] have to go back,” “They seek conquest, not asylum,” and, worst of all, “Love your nation.”

Obviously, these are all debatable political opinions—because that is the very nature of all political opinions—but I personally agree with many of them, and so do millions of other increasingly angry actual native British people whose votes are never listened to. Melia even had one sticker reading “Intolerance is a virtue”—I argued something eerily similar myself here on Takimag recently. Please don’t print the article out and paste it to your local bus stop, or I’ll get ten years mining salt in Siberia.

Let us be fair to the authorities here, though. Sam Melia had a poster of Adolf Hitler hanging inside his garage and possessed a book by Jew-hating former British Union of Fascists leader (and also onetime Jew-hating left-wing British Labour Party MP, although that particular factoid is rarely mentioned, funnily enough…) Oswald Mosley in his house—which some may find appalling, but others might say, “So what? It’s his bloody house, isn’t it?”

False Labels Often Stick
According to the leading “anti-fascist” group Hope Not Hate (whose other ideas of an “extremist” include perfectly mainstream figures like Nigel Farage), like so many a neo-Nazi, Herr Melia did indeed possess certain deluded anti-Semitic views, posing online under the false Holocaust-baiting pseudonym “UKOvenDealer” and distributing stickers showing kippahs with the slogan “SMALL HATS, BIG PROBLEM.”

Hope Not Hate also exposed him arguing in undercover recordings that, if stirring up animosity against Muslims was “what it takes to make the Saxon hate,” then this should be used as a prelude to later directing the true racial opprobrium of “the Saxon” toward “this big-nose fella over here,” by which he did not mean Cyrano de Bergerac. Then again, Melia was also revealed as calling Labour “the party of hyperventilating faggots and Paki rapists,” so perhaps his judgment was not wholly flawed upon every matter.

Interestingly, it was the specifically anti-Semitic nature of some of Sam’s stickers that was cited by the presiding judge as one of the main reasons for the length of his sentence:

“You hold Nazi sympathies and you are an anti-Semite. Whilst your activity [of distributing stickers] ceased in 2021, recent events [i.e., pro-Hamas hate marches held across the U.K. since the October 7 attacks in Israel] in the United Kingdom demonstrate that there is, for the first time since the 1930s, a real risk of gross, potentially violent, anti-Semitism becoming normalized on our streets. The publication of this kind of material is corrosive to our society and highly damaging. Anti-Semitism, in particular, is a destructive force. It has been used before to tear at the heart of Western democracy. It must not be allowed to do so again.”

How is it possible to effectively blame Mr. Melia for somehow helping anti-Semitism become “normalized” on British streets when the very people openly marching in its name right now are mainly Islamist militants and far-left neo-Marxists, traditionally two of the main enemies of neo-Nazis like Sam is said to be? Islamists in 2024 now spread hate across Britain on a weekly basis via huge street rallies and attempted assaults on Parliament and MPs, and yet somehow the main radical to blame for all this is an obscure right-wing white man who once gave away some shitty little free decals on the internet, but stopped three years ago when police wasted their own time by arresting him for it?

If anti-Semitism in public is now so incredibly unacceptable in the U.K., how come a few weeks before Sam Melia got two years for the square root of sod all, three women who attended a pro-Palestine march in London bearing stickers of paragliders like those used by Hamas terrorists during their October 7 pogrom stuck onto their clothes received noncustodial conditional discharges, despite being found guilty under the terms of the Terrorism Act?

Some cynics might guess it was because none of the three defendants were white, male, or right-wing in nature, and that the judge was someone named Tan Ikram, who had previously liked a post online expressing the idea that Israel was itself a “terrorist” country in an act of self-described “error,” which does sound suspiciously like a potential conflict of interest here.

Meanwhile, only last December, this very same Judge Ikram had handed down suspended sentences, including community service and mandatory attendance at a Maoist reeducation workshop, to six retired white policemen for sending one another racist, sexist, and homophobic jokes in a wholly private online chat group, something that is apparently now contrary to the Communications Act 2003, at least whenever prosecutors want it to be. Ikram also later openly boasted about sending another cop to jail for twenty weeks just for sharing online jokes about George “of the Jungle” Floyd—what an excellent way to maintain continued public confidence in the impartiality of the British justice system.

The Law Is an Ass, So Fuck It
The double standards of Britain’s two-tier legal system are obvious for all to see. In the wake of Melia’s sentencing, social media lit up with normal people with eyes Evil Nazis highlighting the (very many) examples of non-white immigrants in the U.K. handed down way more lenient sentences for crimes rather worse than stickering—that of Hamoud Al-Soami, for example, a Kuwaiti rape-gang member currently busily colonizing Newcastle who was recently convicted of sexually assaulting girls ages 12 and 13, before receiving a pathetic “punishment” of 180 hours community service. The biggest service he could have performed for the community would have been to kill himself.

One quote—possibly fake, as I couldn’t find it cited in any mainstream media reporting of the Sam Melia trial, although that means next to nothing these days—appeared online, to the effect that the judge, when handing down Sam his two-year incarceration, supposedly said, “The sentence would have been much longer had you actually committed a crime.”

Even if literally false, the quote tells a far wider truth: that, in Great Britain today, it really is one law for them, and one law for us. I’m off to order a big bunch of weed from my nearest lamppost to take my mind off matters. It can’t lead to any greater florid opium dream than the contemporary liberal fantasy that we all currently enjoy a state of “full equality under the eyes of the law,” can it? The only way in which British “Justice” is now genuinely blind is to its own blatant flaws.

The Week’s Most Bah, Blah, and Erin-Go-Bragh Headlines

AN APPLE A DAY KEEPS THE TEACHER AWAY (HOPEFULLY)
The Long Beach (California) Unified School District has paid $900,000 to a group called “Californians for Justice,” which bribes students $1,400 each to participate in “racial and social-justice warrior training programs.” The district’s previously paid the org $2,000,000.

Next time some blowhard claims, “We don’t pay our teachers enough,” remind him that the districts have the cash…just different priorities.

Amazingly, that’s not the worst SoCal school story of the week. In L.A.’s School District 1, the UTLA teachers’ union banked $650,000 on a Holocaust-denying black School Board candidate named Kahllid al-Alim, a conspiracy nut who claims “the Jews” faked Sandy Hook and all the victims were “crisis actors.”

It took ten days to tally the Super Tuesday votes (the ballot workers attended L.A. schools, so they can’t count beyond three digits), and al-Alim is headed to a runoff. Last month, the UTLA claimed it would withdraw its endorsement of Malcolm al-X Jones, but oddly they didn’t get around to it until after the election (remember, promptness is white supremacy!).

District 1 is one of L.A.’s legendary snakelike districts that connects disparate, faraway neighborhoods. It starts in the far-south ghettos that have street names like Slaughtered Whites Street and Raped Bitch Boulevard, and it winds north, past LAX, to the Westside, where it ends in the ritzy Jewish Beverly Hills-adjacent neighborhoods of Cheviot Hills and Beverlywood. In an unbelievable move, al-Alim blanketed those neighborhoods with appeals for money (each donor got a complimentary copy of Protocols of Zion, “so you Hebes can see that we knows wut you’s up to”).

Appealing for Jewish cash when you hate Jews takes balls. The last time a black man was lugging stones that big, he was being whipped by a quarry overseer.

BTW, several celebrities come from District 1 schools, including Shia LaBeouf, Nipsey Hussle, and Takimag scribe David Cole.

That district breeds trouble.

THE CURRY CHICKENS HAVE COME HOME TO POOST
Another progressive prosecution success story: Sheldon Johnson, a convicted black murderer and “free da black men” advocate who wowed Joe Rogan with tales of how “prisons be racist” (to be fair, Rogan was so stoned he thought he was talking to Shelly Johnson, the character from Twin Peaks. “Whoa, you know Laura Palmer? She’s hot!”).

“You don’t see a lot of black faces in City Council District 4, but you do see a lot of black feces.”

Last week in Harlem, Johnson murdered a new man, carved up the body, put it in a freezer, then fled the scene in a blonde wig. He was arrested on charges of homicide and cultural appropriation.

Meanwhile, another L.A. race that took ten days to call…

You don’t see a lot of black faces in City Council District 4, but you do see a lot of black feces. For almost two years now, District 4—which encompasses hipster Silver Lake, ritzy Hollywood Hills, and restaurant row on Ventura Boulevard in the San Fernando Valley, has been terrorized by a homeless man who carries a bag of his own excrement, which he throws at anyone unfortunate enough to cross his path.

The guy’s got the aim of a major leaguer; he’s a regular Cy Dung. And he has the protection of the district’s councilwoman—India-born socialist Nithya Raman (aka the one bride who should be burned). Raman’s spent the past two years threatening business owners who try to prevent Scatchel Paige from tossing his waste. And before you judge Raman too harshly, remember that in her homeland, feces-flinging is the national pastime.

On Super Tuesday, Raman faced Ethan Weaver, a law & order openly gay white dude who knows that poop’s for packing not chucking.

But thanks to help from Hollywood Hills heavy hitters, Raman won more than 50 percent, meaning no runoff; she’s reelected.

People at the victory party were cautioned to avoid the “fudgecake.”

It’s also best to avoid Ventura Boulevard eateries, now renamed “Mammy Row” because everyone who enters exits looking like Jolson.

IN-BREAD MORONS
One more California story…

When blacks were torching American cities, AOC—aka “how terrible AI would depict a Latina”—defended the rioters, claiming they were just “stealing bread to feed their families.”

Sure, the thugs were looting Nike stores, but that’s only because blacks are such huge Charlie Chaplin fans, they take his shoe-eating scene from The Gold Rush as nutritional advice.

But last week, AOC reacted angrily when a bunch of anti-Israel Muslims and their shills hounded her as she and her ginger pansy boyfriend (“A-wreck the Red”) were leaving a cineplex, having just seen Blue Beetle for the tenth time. The gaga-Gazans asked why AOC wasn’t doing more to get “bread” to the starving akbars, who are forced to subsist on the stale unleavened crap the IDF throws at them like ninja stars (Matzo of the Flying Guillotine, coming soon from Yoram Globus).

And Governor Newsom is having his own bread issues. The bill he signed raising the minimum wage for burger flippers to $20 an hour (just enough to cover the injuries caused by black customers angry at the price increases necessitated by the raise) includes an exemption for bakeries. Why? Because Newsom’s biggest donor is Panera Bread magnate Greg Flynn.

Newsom’s angrily declared that Panera is not exempt.

Is that true? In stepped the L.A. Times, whose owner, Chinese billionaire Patrick Soon-Shiong, is a big Newsom fan because the bill does exempt restaurants that serve dog. The Times ran a piece last week stating “does the exemption cover Panera? Who knows!”

Now that’s journalism, from an outfit whose “investigative reporter” Adam Elmahrek insists that he knows for a fact that no Jewish women were raped on October 7th, because he didn’t see it on TV. So Times “journalists” sitting comfortably in L.A. can know with certainty the fate of every single Israeli woman on 10/7, but knowing the specific details of a law in their own backyard? Impossible! What do you think they are, psychic?

Newsom, AOC, Soon-Shiong, Elmahrek. Half-baked charlatans with infected yeast who aren’t even worthy of being pigeon food.

WINDOW TO THE SOUL (SISTAS)
2 a.m., Houston. Two female deputies approach a second-floor apartment, following calls from neighbors about a burglary. They find the entire front window smashed in, glass everywhere. Suspecting an intruder, the cops call out, “Sheriff’s office! Sheriff’s office! Come out.”

Through the broken window, the deputies see a black woman aiming a gun at them. They unload over thirty shots, even pausing to reload.

And here’s where it gets funny.

The apartment was occupied by two whales of ladies, Laronda Berry and Eboni Pouncy (a woman of such girth, the last thing she ever “pounced” on was an all-you-can-eat ribs buffet…and the seismic repercussions were felt in Oregon).

Turns out the two dark damocloids had a habit of forgetting their keys. And every time they did? They’d just smash out the entire front window, because that’s the only way they knew to deal with lost keys.

It was Pouncy who approached the deputies with her gun, and even though her size makes her the only Texan visible from the moon, of the thirty-plus shots fired by the female responders, every bullet missed except for five nonfatal grazes.

Almost every bullet missed a target the size of Shamu. Nice training at the Houston DEI range.

Video shows Pouncy—rap name Heavy D-fenestrate—walking (slowly, so as not to snap her ankles) down the stairs after the incident, cussing officers with variations of “oh no you dih’nt.”

Berry, who’s now suing, held a press conference complaining that the neighbors shouldn’t have called the cops because “dis da third time dat window been broken.”

Blobdingnagian gun-toting black geniuses who keep forgetting their keys even after having to repeatedly smash their way into their apartment in the middle of the night must be a joy for neighbors and landlord alike. Makes one suspect that the person who called 911 was hoping for officers with better aim.

THESE AREN’T THE DROIDS ANYONE’S LOOKING FOR
Muslim men are so hostile to women, even a Dubai droid developed sentience last week and butt-groped a female reporter.

As-salamu alaykum? “I like’um u ass.”

The notion of Third World androids is rather frightening. Muslims with computerized aim stoning gays. Mechanized Hindus browning sidewalks with supersonic speed. And think of the Chinese! Can you imagine if they begin mass-producing androids? Millions of emotionless non-dimorphic expressionless automatons that obey orders blindly and seek only to serve the hive mind.

Well, okay. Chinese androids would be redundant.

Speaking of Muslims and brainless, soulless hive-minders, at last week’s Oscars, a noisy crowd of anti-Israel street protesters blocked Hollywood’s dimmest stars from shining on the public. Motorcades carrying the “independent thinkers” and “creative geniuses” responsible for that female-led superhero film and that one and that one and that one (ad infinitum) became stuck in traffic, as if anyone in L.A. isn’t used to that.

Meanwhile, in London, Gaza protesters have turned parts of the city into “no-go” zones. What a tragedy—now you can’t be enriched by this cesspool of knife-wielding savages and immigrant detritus.

Dear Muslims: Stopping people from getting into the Oscars…stopping people from experiencing modern-day London…you’re doing them a favor, you tards.

Of course, the coke-fueled androids of Hollywood dutifully wore their “ceasefire now” bloody-hand pins. Some of the more vocal anti-Israel “stars” in attendance were Mark Ruffalo (aka “Vincent D’Onofrio but without the talent”), Ava DuVernay (“low-fat Oprah”), Jonathan Glazer, who wishes to change the name of his Oscar-winning Holocaust film to The Noble Cause That Failed, and Navajo model-actress Quannah Chasinghorse—ironically a homophone for that gropey Muslim bot: Quranah Chasingwhores.

For Joey “Sponge-Brain Sh*ts-Pants” Biden and the Democrat Left, it’s the best of times and the worst of times. As three-plus years of an intentionally erased border and the concomitant flood of over 8 million undocumented, unvetted foreigners have caused untold havoc on the safety and security of those of us who still consider ourselves to be American, roving gangs of ultra-violent, heavily armed thugs have toppled the government du jour of Haiti. So, in an election year where even many of the Democrats’ core voting blocs are absolutely up in arms about their supposed champions in government pushing them aside for a whole new crop of “undocumented” Democrat voters and welfare recipients to be, what is the response of their party? What else, but throw down the welcome mat for millions of Haitians to come here and join the tens of thousands who have already managed to get to Mexico and cross over the Rio Grande since 2021.

You can make the case that it’s political suicide, or else there’s madness in their method. A kleptocratic Haitian government devolving into violent anarchy as it’s overthrown is nothing new. Sadly, it’s the way things always have been for at least 100 years, if not longer. About the only period of stability, if you could call it that, was when François “Papa Doc” Duvalier and his son Jean Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier controlled the country between 1957 and 1986. By controlled, I mean with an iron fist that included death squads and other human rights abuses by Duvalier’s infamous paramilitary force known as the Tonton Macoute.

In any case, how the Democrats view the inevitable tidal wave of refugees as the perfect crisis-that-should-not-be-wasted opportunity as a distraction from the erased southern border and not throwing napalm into the heart of Dresden is a mystery to me. But this is exactly what they are intent on doing. Haiti has been such a basket case for so long that I can’t even think of what their key exports are. Dysentery, poverty, voodoo, and evidently cannibalism don’t count.

“The massive waste of money and the multigenerational destruction of a people and a nation are a travesty and a sin.”

Yet they do manage to import billions of dollars in American foreign aid money that has only enriched thugs and criminals. Primarily the Clintons:

The imprint of Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton is indelible. The couple’s presence and impact on the Caribbean island have brought nothing but prolonged despair for the Haitians. Their elusive and opaque deals in the country have not done anything to alleviate the country out of poverty depths. The purported interests of helping Haiti from its myriad of problems have only caused stagnation in Haiti….

Bill Clinton’s influence in Haiti ranges from the 1990s agricultural policies in Haiti that destroyed the country’s rice industry to the meddling in internal affairs and finally to the earthquake. There is a sense of permanency attached to the Clintons’ name as regards their activities in Haiti, particularly the Clinton Foundation.

When the earthquake struck, the global response was to send in donations to Haiti. But of course, that needed a commission that would be designed to have an oversight role as regards the disbursement of the various relief packages pouring through. The Clintons stepped up to lead the global response. The Interim Haiti Recovery Commission (IHRC) was brought into life and Bill Clinton was selected to be its co-chair. At that time, Hillary Clinton was still the Secretary of State and thus responsible for channeling USAID relief spending to Haiti….

The failure by the IHRC to rebuild Haiti is still haunting Haiti. The failed agricultural policies by the US made sure Haiti, a country that produced its own rice, would be reliant on US food to the extent that Haiti imports food from the US. Foreign aid is continuously pumped into Haiti, and no plan is made to bolster the country’s own capacity to rebuild and produce.

Haiti is still run on which business finds favor with the US, and while the Clintons were in charge of the US, they presided over all these failed policies. It is high time the onus to build Haiti shifts back to the government.

This article was from four years ago. Four years later, Jimmy “Barbeque” Cherizier, a former police officer who is accused of mass murder, arson, rape, and even cannibalism, is running the show. And with $5 billion in aid already down the drain since the 2010 earthquake, Biden & Co. are itching to send more money there while allowing millions of Haitians to come here. Makes perfect sense, no?

The massive waste of money and the multi-generational destruction of a people and a nation are a travesty and a sin. Those of our politicians who profited off of Haitian misery must be called to account. At the same time, what is it about the character of the Haitian people themselves that has allowed this situation to fester so horribly for so long?

In a moment of frustration, Trump exclaimed, “Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?”

[Then-President Trump] was unconvinced by a proposal to insulate immigrants from Haiti and a number of other countries from deportation; instead, according to the Washington Post, he suggested “that the United States should…bring more people from countries such as Norway” and “from Asian countries because he felt that they help the United States economically.” At the time, Trump’s colorful choice of words was “denounced across the globe,” Politico relayed gravely. But as it pertains to Haiti, at least, they may have been an understatement.

The U.S. State Department appears to have reached a similar conclusion: Last week, it urged Americans in Haiti to leave the country and directed U.S. military forces to evacuate American Embassy staff overnight.

The move couldn’t come soon enough. What is transpiring in Haiti is so post-apocalyptic—so unspeakably brutal—that it would be impossible to believe were it not for the steady stream of phone videos and first-person testimonials substantiating the media reports pouring out of the country. “Millions of Haitians Face Starvation as Gangs Aim for Total Takeover, Free 5,000 Prisoners,” reads one recent headline. “Haiti Gangs Launch Main Airport Seige, Massacring People ‘Indiscriminately’ Days After Massive Jail Break,” reports another. This weekend’s Washington Post report, titled “Haitians shot dead in the streets and there’s no one to take the corpses away,” paints a picture of the scene on the ground….

Spurred on in part by this persistent barbarism, the Dominican Republic, Haiti’s neighbor to the east, constructed a border wall separating the two nations in 2022. The following year, as the gang violence continued to worsen on the western side of the wall, the Dominicans initiated a complete border shutdown, deploying military patrols to secure the borderlands and carrying out mass deportations to repatriate more than 176,000 Haitian migrants. Haitians protested the indignity by burning tires at the Dominican border.

Here at home, the Biden [junta] has taken more or less the opposite approach. Since fall 2022, the White House has been running a special program allowing up to 30,000 people per month to legally immigrate to the U.S. from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. As of January 2024, the program has admitted more than 357,000 into the country, including 138,000 Haitians (far more than any of the other three nationalities)….

For all the high-minded talk of “American values,” the simple and obvious truth is that when you import a large number of people from a foreign country in a short amount of time, your country begins to look more like the one those people came from. This is true in all places and in all times: Italian immigration, for example, radically altered the character of America; even now, with the Italian-American diaspora fully “assimilated,” the United States is markedly different than it would have been had they never arrived in the first place.

The same was true of Irish immigration and German immigration (a major source of concern for many of the Founding Fathers); it is true of Mexicans, and Poles, and Scots-Irish, and every other cohort that has come to America from another country in substantial numbers. To ignore that, or to refuse to examine the character of an immigrant’s home—to pretend that all nations of origin are created equal—is to embed a deep and dangerous naïveté into our immigration system.

In every instance, America today is the way it is, in part, because of the character of its immigrants, one in turn formed as the result of the character of the place from which they came. That’s the double-edged sword of “assimilation”: The people become more like their adopted home, but their adopted home also becomes more like them. Americans should think long and hard about what it would mean to become more like Haiti.

The author makes an interesting point vis-à-vis “the double-edged sword of assimilation.” No doubt the character of America as it was in 1789 is in a sense radically different from what became after the first mass wave of immigration between 1880 and 1920. But the key word here is “assimilation.” It changed, yet it was made better and stronger and arguably even more “American” in a sense than what even the Founders imagined. In the early ’20s, we shut our door for 40 years or so, in order that the millions who landed here could assimilate and become Americanized. Most important, so that their children who were to be born here could be that way the moment they arrived.

Today, not only is the word “assimilation” itself taboo, but what we are experiencing is no less than a deliberate effort to completely annihilate the character, culture, traditions, and history of this nation as it was founded and what controlled immigration with mandatory assimilation had created—the greatest, freest, most prosperous society in history. And the brainwashing of America’s native-born children to reject their birthright and heritage as evil, and demand it be replaced with the kind of tyranny their forebears fled, is just as evil, if not more so. It’s classic divide and conquer.

Looking back, the Haitians that I knew and went to school with 50 years ago in the melting pot of melting pots, Brooklyn USA, were fleeing the nightmare hellscape of the Duvaliers and for the most part, at least in my experience, became fully Americanized. In fact, it was to such an extent that they earned the enmity of native-born black Americans who, by that time, had fully bought into the toxic propaganda of Democrat-invented victimization culture, and all the rot that went with it. Bitterly ironic that black Americans have been destroyed to such an extent by the welfare state, abortion, family dissolution, and the blood libel of “institutional white supremacy” that the Democrats now have to import millions of foreign indigents to take their place at the voting booth. Yet that is the cold, hard, and simple truth as to why we have an erased border, zero immigration controls, and of course nothing even approaching any kind of program of assimilation. The fact that we have had institutionalized and government-mandated programs of bilingualism and multilingualism for decades just underscores the point.

As for Trump rightly questioning the sanity of flooding America with millions of people from “sh*thole countries,” it might sound cruel, but many times the truth is indeed cruel. Haiti has been a failed state for decades, like Mexico, much of Latin America, and a good chunk of the rest of the third world that continues to flood in, unchecked. But the D.C. junta will insist that millions of Haitians must be settled here. Along with a few million “Palestinians” from Gaza. And we’ll not only have to accept it, we’ll be forced to cheer it on as we transmogrify ourselves into Haiti itself.

The left has a new goal: degrowth!

We should “buy less stuff,” forgive debts, grow our own food, etc.

They say this will “build a more just and sustainable society” and “save the planet” from “climate chaos.”

This idea is popular with capitalism-haters.

One at a ChangeNow “eco conference” says, “A smaller, slower economy could also be a sweeter economy.”

A sweeter economy? What nonsense.

We already unintentionally experimented with “degrowth.”

During the pandemic, frightened politicians closed businesses and ordered people to stay home.

Growth stopped.

“Only when you aren’t worried about your next meal can you start thinking about preserving nature.”

“Did that save us?” asks Swedish author Johan Norberg in my new video. “No. It was a terrible tragedy. Sixty million people were thrown into extreme poverty.”

Yet some “degrowth” activists call the pandemic a good thing. “Did a lot of environmental good,” says one on Al Jazeera. “Pollution has been radically cut, emissions have plummeted,” says another.

It’s true. The pandemic did reduce carbon emissions.

“But by no more than 6%!” says Norberg. “If we wanted to reduce global warming,” he says, “We would need one pandemic every year. And that would be a terrible disaster for human life and health.”

Sure would.

Climate change may be a serious threat. But reducing global growth won’t help. It would make things worse. Growth and that much-hated capitalism are our only hope to create the wealth that may help us better adjust to climate change.

Norberg points out, “If we didn’t have any economic growth since the 1950s, we would have slightly less global warming, but around half a million more people would die because of climate-related natural disasters. The risk of dying has declined by some 90%, and that’s not because we have fewer disasters. … It’s because we’ve had economic growth. It means that we improve construction, improve early warning systems, improve health care … we can deal with disasters in a better way.”

Over time, even a little growth makes a huge beneficial difference.

“If Sweden, my own country, had had just one percentage point lower economic growth per capita, then Sweden today would be as poor as Albania.”

“What’s wrong with Albania?” I ask.

“Albanians are a quarter as rich as Swedes,” responds Norberg, “That shows in everything from life expectancy and child mortality to working conditions.”

Albania’s growth was stunted by years of communism. Because of that, today Albanians risk their lives to try to reach capitalist countries.

“That’s what you need to know about different economic and political systems,” says Norberg. “Look at where the refugees go. They always go from more socialist economies to capitalist economies. People risk their lives to get to freedom and prosperity.”

The no-growth advocates don’t acknowledge that. They despise capitalism, and don’t see its benefits. We invited more than a dozen of them to come on Stossel TV to explain the evils of capitalism and describe how degrowth is better. Not one would.

I wish one would come to my studio to argue. I’d ask what he thinks about the claim Norberg makes in his newest book, The Capitalist Manifesto. He says, “The global free market will save the world.”

“That’s grandiose,” I tell Norberg.

“But it is saving the world,” he says. “Bit by bit, step by step. Every day over the past 20 years, more than 130,000 people were lifted out of extreme poverty!”

That means economic growth freed millions from stoop labor, from burning manure for heat, from lives where they die young.

Not only did free markets release people from miserable poverty, when they did, they created conditions where people want to take care of the environment. It’s why capitalist countries are less polluted than socialist ones. Only when you aren’t worried about your next meal can you start thinking about preserving nature.

On top of that, growth may give us the technology to reduce pollution and adjust to climate change.

Degrowth would leave the world poor, miserable and polluted.

Republicans’ embrace of “diversity” has been an unmitigated disaster, as illustrated most recently by Sen. Katie Britt, whose response to President Biden’s State of the Union address came with a double dose of diversity.

Why was this first-term senator chosen? To boost her reelection chances? She’s from the reddest state in the Union, won her last election by 30 points, and her term doesn’t end until 2026.

Because she’s an amazing public speaker? Quite obviously, it wasn’t that.

She gave the response because she’s not a white male. The last time Republicans picked a white man to give the GOP response was in 2012, when Gov. Mitch Daniels gave a great speech, despite the glaring absence of any blubbering over the unique suffering of women and minorities.

“But when it comes to immigration, black Americans might as well be white men.”

Which brings us to Katie. Asked to give the GOP response, she delivered it from her kitchen table because she’s a mom just like you, suburban woman who will never vote Republican.

She not only was “diverse” herself, but she made sure to drag a minority into her argument against Biden’s border policy, which is to have no border.

An open border, Britt told us, is bad for the illegals. This was in accordance with the modern rule of etiquette requiring that no policy be criticized unless it can be shown that it harms someone other than whites, men or Americans.

Thus, for example, affirmative action has been actively screwing white people out of college admissions, jobs and promotions since at least 1970. (Allan Bakke found this out in 1973, when he was rejected from the University of California, Davis, medical school in order to make way for hilariously less-qualified minorities.)

Even after decades of this open, egregious race discrimination, Republicans are terrified of stating the obvious: Discriminating against white people is unfair to white people. Instead, the preferred argument is: “It’s not good for black people, either!”

Perhaps, but they’re not complaining. And we’re still stuck with the unfairness to whites.

It is a remarkable fact that, after more than half a century of rank race discrimination against whites, the Supreme Court finally decided affirmative action was unconstitutional only after it was shown that racial preferences harm Asians.

Similarly, Britt’s argument against the Biden policy of dragging millions of illegal aliens into our country was not that it’s unfair to Americans, although it’s their home that’s being wrecked. No, it was that our nonexistent border is bad for Mexicans.

Thus, Britt said:

“I spoke to a woman who shared her story with me. She had been sex-trafficked by the cartels starting at age 12. She told me not just that she was raped every day, but how many times a day she was raped.

“The cartels put her on a mattress in a shoebox of a room, and they sent men through that door, over and over again, for hours and hours on end.

“We wouldn’t be OK with this happening in a third world country. This is the United States of America, and it’s past time we start acting like it.”

Democrats are permanently destroying the greatest country on Earth — which happens to be where we live — but Rosalita’s life has gone from a negative 9, living in Mexico, to a negative 10 being human-trafficked.

As with affirmative action, the GOP can only attack illegal immigration by saying it’s bad for the illegal immigrants, who apparently are driven by some invisible force to stream into our country. Their illegal behavior is something we’re doing to them.

Help! Someone keeps burning down my house!

GOP: Oh my gosh — was the arsonist hurt?

In producing a diverse person to make her case, Britt botched the story six ways from Sunday.

As we now know, the serial rapes didn’t happen in this country, but in Mexico. Even if they had occurred here, who did Britt imagine was doing the raping? As described in my book Adios, America!, child rape is rife in Latin America. It’s their culture, having nothing to do with our enticing open border. My idea: Let’s not let that rape culture come here.

The rapes also didn’t happen under Biden, but under President George W. Bush.

So that was great. Britt’s bleating for a diverse person gave Democrats something to talk about other than the thousands of American lives snuffed out by illegals at a rate of about 40 a week.

Britt could have talked about 27-year-old Washington State Trooper Christopher Gadd, killed days before the SOTU by an illegal in a “sanctuary state”; 10-year-old A.J. Wise, killed while walking home from school last month by an illegal alien hit-and-run driver in Midland, Texas; Travis Wolf, killed in Missouri by a boozed-up illegal in December — the night before Travis’ 12th birthday; Diane Hill Luckett, mother of three, who died in March of last year after being smashed into by a drunk illegal alien with a string of criminal convictions to his name (and zero deportations); or David Breaux and Karim Abou Najm, stabbed to death by an illegal alien on a killing spree in Davis, California, last April.

Half of the murdered Americans I just listed were black. But when it comes to immigration, black Americans might as well be white men. “Illegal immigrant” trumps “American” because diversity is our greatest strength.

I recently watched a Swedish movie, 1939, as good a film as I’ve seen in years, with a beautiful young blonde as the heroine, and with none of those boring Bergman silences that trademarked his movies. Alas, nowadays the moronic youth that watches movies prefers the visible to exceed reality, ergo endless science fiction and horror fantasies. It all has to do with the moneymen. As a Hollywood-based friend once described a movie big shot with whom he had recently made a movie, “He married a tart, and dragged her down to his level.”

The recent Oscars, I’m told, were a drag, but at least Emma Stone and Oppenheimer are worth watching. Yes, Hollywood still fascinates, however grotesquely. Being au courant with modern sensibilities means normal people do not merit depiction as such, but as freaks, a role reversal worthy only of Hollywood. And this is where our Western culture has gone wrong. While communism imploded and the free markets took command during the late ’80s and early ’90s, the victors ignored the culture and allowed the Marxists to take command. Universities, TV studios, the media, and Hollywood were all taken over by the left, which then infiltrated Silicon Valley and Big Tech. Now it’s too late, the bad guys are in and the good guys are running scared.

“Looking around, all I see are brainwashed people endlessly repeating things they’ve learned from watching TV commercials and down-market movies.”

Looking around, all I see are brainwashed people endlessly repeating things they’ve learned from watching TV commercials and down-market movies. Although Scotland is 95 percent white and England 82 percent—only 4 percent of Britain is black—every commercial and every presenter of news and such is close to 50 percent black. In the U.S. the whites are now at 59 percent, yet the overrepresentation of the so-called underrepresented, the blacks, is even more drastic still. See what I mean by losing the cultural wars?

Our cultural leaders have also rewritten our past. George Washington is now at times depicted as black, as are all those black founders in Hamilton, and the Brits are not far behind. That poor headless Anne Boleyn has been shown as black, as has half the regency. They’ve even retroactively made Mozart black, but at least they haven’t credited him with rap.

Universities, needless to say, churn out the antiwhite propaganda quicker than you can say Stalin, ignoring the classics of Greek and Roman antiquity because it is too white. And yet, dead white males have done all the heavy lifting these past 2,000 years, with Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Mozart, Beethoven, Bach, Tolstoy, Flaubert, Hemingway, and the rest of the giants now needing to have blackface imposed on them. But if I stood up and quoted the above segment in any college in Britain or America I would be lynched, although—and here I’m bragging—it would take quite a lot of these weenies who have had the wool pulled over their eyes.

But let’s get back to the movies, as literature and the rest of the arts might confuse the present-day bunch. I have discovered a way to make a fortune, and it deals with moving pictures, as once upon a time the present filth was called. As in every successful film, you need goodies and baddies. You cast whites as baddies and blacks as goodies and presto, you have the reviewers and the New York Times ignoramuses on your side. The next step is trickier. The white males in the film need to be not only in the wrong but also weak-willed when compared with the black women they’re in contact with. No black woman should be portrayed as being dumb or having too many children by the time she’s 18 years of age. Just as no white man should be shown not to be a white supremacist.

The baddies in the film all have to be self-employed and to be exploiting people. The goodies are all into nursing or playing the bongo drums on Park Avenue while raising money for underage pregnant women who have been raped by whites. Straight people are out—if you want your film to be reviewed, that is, especially straight white people. Married white couples should never be shown as happy—unlike married black couples—but living in misery and relieving their unhappiness by putting obstacles in the way of young black gays.

Do not make the mistake of depicting a woman with a shrill voice, a turned-down mouth, messy hair, and a manner that would scare a Gestapo torturer. If you need to cast an Oriental, make him or her neutral and without a Charlie Chan accent. Palestinians can be portrayed as killers and blowers-up of things, and their roles reversed by Israelis if and when the film is shown in Arab countries. Dedicate the movie to some woman who was killed in a Trump rally, and invent a good name for her to be seen as the curtain falls. Do all of the above, open a Swiss bank account, do not reveal the secret of your success, and keep reading Takimag for future advice.

Why is Trump ahead in the polls over Biden, even though several traditional measures of electoral viability suggest the incumbent should be in good shape? For example, the Dow Jones average was over 38,000 on Monday. I can recall when Dow 36,000 was considered an ironic joke.

A fairly sensible reason that Biden is in trouble is that he is seen as representing the Establishment. And the Establishment discredited itself in 2020 by going bonkers, as can be seen by the rolling back in recent months of various Diversity Inclusion Equity initiatives foolishly adopted during the post–George Floyd lunacy, despite them being obvious bad ideas.

To take one instance of the tide turning, corporations now appear to be shedding many expensive DIE executives they added during their racist antiwhite “racial reckoning.”

I was going to call these staffers “deadweight,” but it’s likely that they tend to be not just a waste of space, but an outright detriment to getting work done.

“The Times was not terribly interested in preferences for blue-collar families back in the past.”

Similarly, the trend against standardized testing requirements in college admissions is fading as elites slowly realize it was stupid.

On Monday, the U. of Texas became another prestigious institution to announce that testing is now once again required for applicants, a trend begun by MIT and since followed by Brown, Dartmouth, and Yale.

This reversal is especially striking because last summer the Supreme Court, as expected, spoke out against affirmative action at Harvard. The fad for canceling test requirements appealed as a way to prevent the Supreme Court from discovering any hard evidence of discrimination against unfavored races: We don’t have the applicants’ test scores, your honor, but we reviewed their essays and recommendations and, wouldn’t you know, it turned out that blacks have much better personalities than Asians, holistically speaking.

Mandates for high school seniors to submit their SAT or ACT test scores to colleges were initially suspended during Covid lockdowns, but then were made permanent as part of the BLM madness and in anticipation of the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision that after 54 years, affirmative action was overripe. The University of California even decided in 2021 to ban any student from voluntarily submitting his test scores in order to crack down on California’s plague of high-achieving Asians.

Not surprisingly, this trend has been a disaster for the quality of freshmen classes. Texas revealed this week the results of its four-year experiment with not requiring applicants to submit test scores (although allowing those who wish to flaunt their test scores to “opt in”):

Those who opted in had a median SAT score of 1420, compared with a median of 1160 among those who did not.

A 1420 is at the 98th percentile of a nationally representative sample (including those who don’t take a college admissions test), while an 1160 is at the 76th percentile. A 1420 SAT score is equivalent to a 32 on the ACT, while 1160 equals 24.

The 260-point gap between those who choose to be evaluated in part on their test scores and those who don’t is equivalent to 1.2 standard deviations, which is, to put it in highly technical terms, a lot.

The impact of this test score gap on grade point average at the U. of Texas has been unsurprisingly massive. UT reports:

The higher standardized scores translated on average to better collegiate academic performance. Of 9,217 first-year students enrolled in 2023, those who opted in had an estimated average GPA of 0.86 grade points higher during their first fall semester, controlling for a wide range of factors, including high school class rank and GPA.

Note that due to grade inflation over the decades, college grades have compressed from A (4.0), B (3.0), C (2.0), and D (1.0) down to something more like A (4.0), A– (3.7), B+ (3.3), and B (3.0). Thus, UT’s average GPA in 2019 was 3.36. And since then, most schools have seen more grade inflation in this decade as standards have become even laxer in the Lazy ’20s.

So, a 0.86 GPA gap is huge. (Especially when controlled for other factors.)

Those same students were estimated to be 55% less likely to have a first semester college GPA of less than 2.0, all else equal.

Many college freshmen get in over their heads and have a depressingly disastrous first semester. Affirmative action contributes to how many 18-year-olds suffer mental illness.

Why do we want to debilitate young people like this?

Note that the Establishment had the data in 2020 to predict what has since happened. For example, the U. of California faculty senate commissioned a panel of leading social scientists, who endorsed keeping test requirements. But the UC Regents banned students from submitting test scores anyway in 2021.

So, many of the self-inflicted wounds of the 2020s weren’t even accidents. They were the result of a collective delusion that the data could be ignored for…reasons.

Also this week, The New York Times published its own study of how the top 80 most competitive colleges could cunningly evade the Supreme Court’s ruling by giving preferences that aren’t superficially racial to boost black and Hispanic admissions, such as by preferring working-class students.

The Times was not terribly interested in preferences for blue-collar families back in the past. But now that the Supreme Court has determined that the 14th Amendment’s demand for “equal protection of the laws” means what it says, the Times they are a-changin’.

As is so common with Times articles, reading it all the way to the end reveals numerous politically inconvenient facts. The NYT starts off with the woke explanation for why colleges use affirmative action, with the third and fourth paragraphs stating:

On average, students from families with more resources tend to do better on measures like the SAT.

Black and Hispanic students, who tend to be poorer and have less access to opportunity, often do worse.

So, their analysis asks, what if instead of giving preferences based on race, you gave preferences based on class?

Of course, it turns out that the best blacks are most bourgeois blacks, and that preferring ghetto blacks over suburban blacks in college admissions is a really bad idea.

But who has the courage to notice that?

The NYT study lumps blacks and Hispanics in one group and whites and Asians in another, which helps cover up the huge gap between blacks and Asians that NYT subscribers would prefer never to think about.

But if you dig into the data, you can approximate the black share under different admissions policies, which is what nice white people care about.

The model starts off by looking at what college admissions would look like if the top 80 colleges just let in all applicants who scored 1300 or above on the SAT. The Times doesn’t report the black share of admittees of the top 80 undergraduate policies under this policy, but it looks like around 2 percent. (Similarly, a 2008 study found that the top 14 law schools would be 1.1 percent black without racial preferences.) In contrast, blacks make up approaching 14 percent of college-age Americans.

Then the study examines the impact of crediting the poorest applicants with an extra 150 points on their SAT test score over the richest applicants.

Problem solved! Right?

Eh… This appears to boost the black share from 2 percent to 3 percent. As the Times admits in its 16th and 17th paragraphs:

But the shifts toward racial diversity are modest. The Black student share rises by just one percentage point. Why? Black families are over-represented among poorer households in America, but in terms of total numbers, there are still many more poorer white households.

Of course, the Black families deserve to be treated better than the white households, as you can tell by whom the NYT capitalizes.

For this reason, income is a relatively weak proxy for race in admissions. A preference for lower incomes produces just that: students with lower incomes, not necessarily a much larger share of Black or Hispanic students.

In other words, blacks and Latinos score low on cognitive tests less because they are poor than because they are African American and Hispanic.

Next, the model tries doubling the class preference to a maximum of 300 points:

In addition to a preference for low-income students, what if we added a preference for those who attend higher poverty schools?

This scenario takes the 150-point income preference in Scenario 1 and adds a second 150-point preference for students in higher-poverty schools, as measured by the share of students in that school receiving free or reduced-price lunch. A low-income student in a high-poverty school could get as much as a 300-point boost.

This would raise the black share at the top 80 colleges to about 5 percent.

Swell.

Still unsatisfactory.

So, the Times tries awarding an extra 450 points on the SAT to some applicants:

Scenario 3 of 4:

Finding the outliers

It’s possible to take the underlying idea in Scenario 2 and dial it up further, by identifying students who outperform their peers with similar disadvantages (or similar advantages).

The theory is that:

Students who outperform their peers are academic outliers, and that may indicate something special about them:

That sounds inspiring, but it’s not actually true. Social scientists have been hoping to prove this for generations without success.

It would be wonderful if kids routinely progressed from mediocre elementary school pupils to genius grad students, but it doesn’t actually happen very often.

It turns out that social constructionism has some truth to it: The top contributors to the human race tend to have benefited from both nature and nurture.

I believe in this and it’s been tested by research.

One of the many weird things of the 2020s is the growing urge among white liberals, such as NYT staffers, to decimate the ranks of bourgeois blacks in prestigious colleges. In truth, you’re not actually going to like the results: Barack Obama types really are better than George Floyd types.

Acting as if some high school students enjoy an extra two standard deviations of intelligence more than they actually do boosts the black share to 8 percent, finally a little more than half their share of the young population (14 percent).

In reality, 85-IQ students can’t do the college work that 115-IQ students can, and 115-IQ students can’t keep up with 145-IQ students.

I recently got to know a high school student with an IQ somewhere out around 160 who earned a four-year full-ride scholarship to Caltech for his publication in an academic journal advancing the cutting edge in artificial intelligence.

Personally, I had no idea what he was talking about.

Congratulations, MAGA. You got your Biden/Trump rematch.

Just so you know, us opinion journalists were hoping for a long, eventful primary…because we need material. As Eric Swalwell laments to his Chinese concubines, it wasn’t supposed to climax this quick.

But climax it has, and only the fanatics are pleased. The “god-king Trump” MAGAs on one end, and the “Biden’s sharp as ever and he whipped inflation” delusionals on the other. This is gonna be one of those elections in which the average voter has to decide which turd’s baggage outweighs the other’s and which douche’s negatives can be more easily overlooked.

So let’s have some fun with local races. Here’s Part I of ol’ Dave’s Super Tuesday recap.

Schiff Steals Home
Gavin Newsom wasn’t on the ballot in Cali last week, but his presence was felt nonetheless. When Dianne Feinstein died, there were three prominent Dems who wanted her seat: beady-eyed Jew Adam Schiff, obese ugly white woman Katie Porter, and fossilized black radical Barbara Lee of Oakland (aka “the one place in California even Mexicans fear to tread”).

“My advice to Garvey: Work the beans.

Newsom punted the appointment, selecting a seat-warmer who wouldn’t seek a full term. That way, he could avoid getting debanked by Schiff, shot by Lee, or sat on by Porter.

A Jew, a fat bimbo, and a black thug walk into a bar. And Newsom leaves.

Wise man.

Schiff may be even wiser. Take note, MAGAs: This is how you carry out a successful op, and it ain’t with fake delegates. Schiff spent $35 million to elevate Republican Steve Garvey to second place in the top 2 open primary. In doing so, he eliminated the chance he might have to run against Porter or Lee in the general. Schiff’s position is that he can handily beat a GOP—even a sports legend. Going up against Porter or Lee would’ve robbed Schiff of the black vote (Lee’s black, and Porter’s the kind of homely fat-ass white woman the average black man sees as an attainable paramour).

But now that the general will be a Dem Jew against a GOP white, Schiff figures he’s on easy street.

Maybe, maybe not. The last GOP to win a statewide race here was Schwarzenegger, and I’ve long said that only another celebrity Republican might stand a chance to repeat that feat. Garvey made a respectable showing in his second-place finish, but that’s because the Dem vote was split three ways. Add Schiff’s votes to Porter’s and Lee’s, and you’ll see that Garvey has a steep uphill climb.

On the plus side, Garvey has the boomer vote sewn up; if you’re over 50 and a lifelong Californian, the man’s name recognition is massive. And boomers do vote in record numbers.

My advice to Garvey: Work the beans. Anyone who’s been to Dodger Stadium the past decade knows that it’s beanier than Tijuana. You won’t hear one word of English. California beans, who don’t vote in record numbers—I mean, they literally don’t vote, no matter how easy the legislature makes it with mail-in ballots—love baseball. And they don’t like politics. Sure, beans lean left politically, but what does it matter if they don’t act on it?

Mr. Garvey, I’m speakin’ to you as a pal here: Don’t try to talk politics to the Mexicans. They do not care about politics. But they love sports, food, music, and respeto.

Go to every bean area in the state, from East L.A. to the San Joaquin Valley, and set up baseball field day meet-’n’-greets. Plenty of food, mariachis, and bol de la béis. Help the niños with their swing. Tell every adult male that they shoulda been in las ligas mayores, the way they handle that bat. Mexican family men love being respected in front of their wife and kids.

Again, these are not political people. So you don’t have to be. Just give them a good day of baseball and respect.

If you can persuade Fernando Valenzuela to join you, boffo! And at the end of the field day, every attendee should get a photo taken with you that’s printed up as a baseball card. A keepsake to show off, something to make them feel respected and respectable to the frijoles back home.

That’s what these people want. Do that all summer long, and you might have a shot.

Sometimes a slugger gets beaned on purpose. And that’s my advice to you.

You’re welcome.

The Yellow Star of Texas
It was the story of the year! And it was all mine. Texas Congressional District 7, encompassing parts of Houston and Sugar Land, was reliably right-wing for, like, ever. But then it was redistricted to incorporate darkest Alief.

Alief so black it don’t know its founding father.

Alief so black Angelina Jolie adopts its highways.

Alief so black the traffic arteries got sickle cell.

Alief so black it was purchased from Mexico on layaway.

The redistricting led to the first victory (in 2018) for a Dem since 1964. But GOPs still see it as flippable.

The two top Republicans running in the primary last Tuesday?

Mbongo Mbabwe, a Nigerian immigrant, and Caroline Kane, an over-the-hill bleach-blonde “Christian mom for liberty.”

Two newcomers, one big difference: Kane pals around with Nazis. She’s a regular on The Stew Peters Show (I alluded to this last week), spewing opinions on morality and Jesus as Peters denies the Holocaust and talks about beating up Jews.

When Kane got the endorsement of the Houston Chronicle, I was ecstatic. Nobody had made the Kane/Peters connection yet. It was my story, my baby! With the Chronicle’s endorsement, I figured Kane would be a shoo-in, and I’d get eight months of material raking her over the “coles.”

I had dreams of riding the story to national prominence, fulfilling my lifelong ambition to be on The View.

Whoopi: “So David, tell us about this shocking story from Texas.”

David: “Holy shit it stinks in here! I mean, I always figured you old bats never wash, but Jesus Christ the studio smells like a free clinic during a yeast infection outbreak.”

(Yes, I’m now doing Family Guy-style cutaways in my column.)

A week before the election, I emailed Kane:

On his February 10th show, Holocaust-denying Peters hosted an “artist” named Arthur Kwon Lee, who refers to Jews as “sewer dwellers.” Affirming that view, Peters stated, “The problem isn’t Zionism, the problem is Jews,” adding, “Jews are cowards. They fake being Jews,” again reiterating, “What do you think the problem is with America? The Jews.”

Lee then states that the time has come to “physically fight” the Jews, to which Peters replies, “I agree. I agree a thousand percent.” Lee states, “Right now the fight is between whites and Jews, and all other ethnicities have to pick a side.” Peters nods in agreement, adding, “Grab a weapon.”

This sounds rather like a call to violence. Does this give you pause regarding appearing on Peters’ show again? If not, I’d very much like to know your reasons, which I’ll print in full in my upcoming column.

Kane, a sniveling coward, refused to respond.

I emailed the entire Houston Chronicle editorial board asking if Kane’s collaboration with Peters might cause them to review their endorsement. They refused to reply.

I never knew Texas was so full of cowards. Lone Star State? More like Don Knotts State.

Prepping for Kane’s primary victory, I even had two potential nicknames for her: “Lord Yee-Haw-Haw” and “Eva Braunfels.”

I am so precious.

But the Texas GOP voters in CD7 chose the Nigerian! By a huge margin! 42 percent to Kane’s 24 percent. Red-state GOPs chose the Bongo over the past-her-prime blonde liberty mom (as with Katie Porter and black men, Kane’s exactly the kind of used-up prune most GOP men can actually attain).

But, though Mbongo came close to 50 percent, he just missed the mark. So there’ll be a runoff on May 28.

The race is actually quite interesting. Kenneth Omoruyi (no, his name’s not Mbongo; I just like being a dick) is a highly educated man who worked in the oil and gas industry in Lagos. He ran a campaign talking about substantive issues like energy policy, while Kane’s entire campaign was her mindlessly repeating “Jesus” and “liberty” as she palled around with psychotic Jew-haters.

And now we have a runoff in May. So I’d like to issue a challenge: Stew Peters, Nick Fuentes, Ron Unz, Candace Owens, these are the imbeciles who believe that the right’s future lies in Jew-hatred and Holocaust denial. I say it doesn’t. How about we use May 28 as a test? I’ll put up $5,000 that Kane gets her clock cleaned by those red-state Republicans. Will any Nazi take that bet? You’ll have two and a half months to let the RED STATERS of CD7 know that Kane is the BASED candidate! The candidate of Holohoax and Protocols of Zion! She should win handily over some African savage, no? Because we’re not talking about the general, but a closed red-state GOP runoff.

Who’ll take my bet? Peters? I know that $5,000 is nothing to you. Fuentes? With all the welfare you get from supporters, you spend $5,000 a day just on hush money to Ali Alexander’s teenage victims.

I say the average GOP voter is repelled by Nazism and Holocaust denial. You say otherwise, that it’s a winning strategy. Let’s put that to the test on May 28. C’mon, guys—humiliate me! Prove me wrong!

I have the courage of my convictions. Do you?

Several days before Super Tuesday, another Stew Peters acolyte—Jew-hating Scottish leftist George Galloway—coasted to victory in a U.K. by-election. He’s now an MP (his first act after winning? A video supporting his good pal “Tooker Carlson”). And last Tuesday in L.A., far-left black Muslim Khallid al-Alim, who thinks Jews faked everything from the Holocaust to Sandy Hook, surged to a runoff thanks to $690,000 from the UTLA teachers’ union, which bankrolled his campaign of Jew-bashing.

“Kill them bleedin’ Jews” Galloway was embraced by U.K. leftists. “Them muthafuckin’ Jews faked the Holocaust” al-Alim made it to a runoff thanks to Dem voters and the teachers’ union.

The lesson to rightists? Leave the Jew-hatred to the degenerate left. It works for them. It doesn’t work for you. The heart and soul of the GOP is working-class whites. These are good people. Moral people. They are not the hate-filled Nazis of Ibram Kendi’s fever dreams. They don’t respond well to “beat up Jews,” and they respond even worse to blasphemers who say, “God commands us to beat up Jews.”

The road to victory for rightists doesn’t start with Stew Peters and his fellow Nazis. It ends with them.

But maybe I’m wrong. So will one of the based Nazibois put up five grand on the May 28 CD7 runoff?

I hope so.

Okay, next week in Part II, the George Gascon DA race, and what the primary told us about the only Jew I would beat up—George Soros.

It’s a good thing President Joe Biden wasn’t strapped to a polygraph while giving his State of the Union speech on Thursday, because his results would have come back about as clean as O.J. Simpson’s. That was especially true when he recited a lot of tall tales — and some whoppers — while touting his administration’s alleged successes.

Here is a list my top five half-truths and in some cases outright fabrications:

1. “My administration cut the deficit by $1.7 trillion.”

This isn’t just a little bit false, it’s an extraordinary and audacious misstatement of fact. The baseline deficit over 10 years, as measured when Biden came into office versus the latest forecast, shows nearly $6 trillion added to the debt since Biden arrived on the scene.

“This isn’t just a little bit false, it’s an extraordinary and audacious misstatement of fact.”

So how does a $6-trillion addition of red ink possibly equate to a $1.7-trillion reduction in the deficit? Someone didn’t pass his basic math exam in high school. It’s disheartening that Biden and his speechwriters thought they could get away with this one.

2. “We will make the rich pay their fair share.”

The top 1% of American tax filers now pay an all-time record-high 46% of taxes. This is according to Biden’s own IRS. If they paid an equal share of their income, they would be paying closer to 26% — not 46%. Does Biden think the rich should pay ALL the taxes? This also doesn’t include the hundreds of billions of dollars of taxes paid by the businesses they created.

3. “I inherited an economy [from Donald Trump] that was on the brink …”

Actually, the economy grew by — ready for this? — 33% in the third quarter of 2020 and 4.1% in the fourth quarter of 2020. The economy was in a full-scale COVID-19 recovery when Biden came into office.

Oh, and inflation then was 1.4%, not the 5.5% average rate under Biden.

Gas prices were $2.39 per gallon — about $1 lower than today.

4. “Fifteen million new jobs created in three years.”

This is an intentional attempt to distort reality. It IS true that 15 million more Americans are working today than in 2020.

What ISN’T true is that these are “new” jobs. Some are, but most aren’t. In fact, two of every three jobs “created” under Biden were simply jobs that went away during COVID-19 then came back after the pandemic was over and blue states FINALLY reopened their businesses. This distortion would be like comparing the number of jobs on a Sunday and then taking credit for all the people going back to work on Monday. Comparing the first three years of the Trump administration versus Biden’s first three years, the rate of NEW job creation was higher under Trump.

“Inflation keeps coming down and mortgage rates will come down as well.”

Mortgage interest rates under Biden have more than doubled. When Biden came into office, the rate was 2.9%, and it averaged about 3.5% under Trump. Under Biden, the rate skyrocketed to 8%, and now nationally it stands at 7.1%. Consequently, according to data from Redfin, the average mortgage payment on a 30-year mortgage for a median-value home has risen from roughly $1,000 a month to nearly $2,000 a month today. Under the Biden plan, some homebuyers will receive a $400 monthly taxpayer subsidy on their mortgage. Even with the new handout, they are STILL roughly $600 a month worse off under Biden policies. Biden is the enemy, not the friend, of the dream of homeownership.