St. Louis CofCC Blog

Pasty white valley girl makes up a story about her being part Indian, being a foster child, raised in a black family, and running dope for the Bloods in the basin.

Why was the book’s publisher so gullible as not to do any basic fact-checking?  My guess is that they ran blindly with this supposedly non-fiction book because they were in tune with the author’s socio-political bias.

Now that the book has been pulled, finding a copy and reading it is going to be a tall order.  But if it is anything like the books written by formal academic gang ethnographers, such as Scott Decker of the University of Missouri-St. Louis, or Mark Fleisher of the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana, then it tells the “truth” (even though in the case of LaC, it’s literally not the truth) about gang activity, but it casts those truths in light of white racism, that which we are made to think is the fundamental perfidy that leads to black and Hispanic gang activity.  Therefore, this is probably why the PC book reviewer crowd fawned over LaC.

The ideology responsible for 100 million dead bodies in the 20th Century now wants to prevent whites from working.

First, from PJB’s latest, on NAFTA:

America rose to power behind a Republican tariff wall. What has free trade wrought? Lost sovereignty. A sinking dollar. A hollowing out of U.S. manufacturing. Stagnant wages. Wives forced into the labor market to maintain the family income. Mass indebtedness to foreign nations, and a deepening dependency on foreign goods and borrowings to pay for them. We have sacrificed our country on the altar of this Moloch, the mythical Global Economy.

It took Rip Van Republican 20 years to wake up to the disaster of open borders and five years to realize the folly of igniting wars in which no vital interest was at risk. How long before the GOP wakes up to the reality that globalism is not conservatism, never was, but is a pillar of Wilsonian liberalism, in whose vineyards our faux conservatives now daily labor.

Second, the magazine he founded exposes Barack Hussein Obama as a phony when it comes to his supposed opposition to the war in Iraq:

Obama’s campaign frequently invokes his 2002 “speech against the war,” but very rarely quotes directly from it. Why? Because this mysterious speech—which has become the stuff of legend in Obamaphilic circles, talked about but rarely read—is a pro-war tirade. Yes, Obama described the planned invasion of Iraq as “dumb” and “rash,” but his overriding concern—expressed repetitively throughout the speech—was that the Bush administration was damaging the legitimate case for American-made wars of intervention and potentially making it harder for future administrations (Democratic, for example) to send soldiers around the world to depose unfriendly regimes.

We knew that Obama’s anti-NAFTA rhetoric in Ohio was just a sideshow.  Now we’re finding out that he’s even more of an arrogant universal egalitarian imperialist than BushClinton.