VDARE.COM has had a contentious relationship with Max Blumenthal, but not for the first time, I think he has something here, adjusted for the usual ethnic paranoia and abuse, in his Daily Beast item The Wildest Moments From CPAC (scroll down):

Though Brimelow is a movement veteran who directly influenced the rise of anti-immigration politics in the GOP, many conservative leaders now shun him because of his openly racialist views. This is ironic considering the crude racism of CPAC’s keynote speaker, Rush Limbaugh, who once claimed “the NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and Crips.” Inside the modern conservative movement, racial resentment pays, but intellectual honesty about it can ruin your career.

(Link in original).

Of course, I don’t think I have “openly racialist views” any more than I think Blumenthal’s account of Limbaugh’s views is accurate. But at VDARE.COM we are prepared to talk frankly about “hate numbers” - the facts about the immigration-driven transformation of America - and Blumenthal is absolutely right that no-one at CPAC dared mention them at all.

Gallup rolled out a major report today on the situation of Muslims residing in America. The lengthy poll results (140 pages, downloadable in PDF here) were tabulated by the Muslim West Facts Project, a partnership between the Gallup pollsters and something called the Coexist Foundation. You can watch the one-hour presser available on C-SPAN Archives.

The New York Times coverage was typically upbeat about diversity: Poll Finds U.S. Muslims Thriving, but Not Content.

A Gallup poll of Muslims in the United States has found that they are far more likely than people in Muslim countries to see themselves as thriving.

In fact, the only countries where Muslims are more likely to see themselves as thriving are Saudi Arabia and Germany, according to the poll.

And yet, within the United States, Muslims are the least content religious group, when compared with Jews, Mormons, Protestants and Roman Catholics.

The poll focused on ordinary areas of education, income, political affiliation and such, but the lengthy paper was more remarkable that it did not include what Americans want to know about Muslims in their midst, namely how many support the jihadist ideology of overturning the Constitution. In short, no tough questions were asked, and the survey makes the 2007 creampuff effort from the Pew Research Center (Muslim Americans: Middle Class and Mostly Mainstream) look hard hitting.

The report’s constant comparisons with other religions [e.g. "Muslim Americans (41%) are the least likely religious group surveyed to be 'thriving' especially when compared with Jewish American (56%) and Mormon Americans (51%)." -- page 10] appear to be an effort to normalize a population that contains a measurable fifth column.

One notable point was how Muslim women were utilizing the freedoms and opportunities available to all in the United States.

American Muslim women, contrary to stereotype, are more likely than American Muslim men to have college and post-graduate degrees. They are more highly educated than women in every other religious group except Jews. American Muslim women also report incomes more nearly equal to men, compared with women and men of other faiths.

Muslim women are apparently happy to explore their potential in a society where such aspirations are possible, while some want to have a Plan B to escape the ball and chain of a violent marriage.

Speaking of that aspect of the Religion of Peace, scholar Daniel Pipes recently observed that accused wife-beheader Muzzammil Hassan stated that he chopped up his wife so she couldn’t reach paradise. Mr. Hassan had started Bridges TV near Buffalo to educate us infidels about the charms of Islamic culture and “portray Muslims in a more positive light.”

Muslims–just another piece in the glorious diverse patchwork of America!

David Weigel gives a straightforward account of the just-concluded Conservative Political Action Conference in The Washington Independent: The Conservatives’ Lost Decade, 3/2/09:

Many conservatives who had felt shut out and marginalized in the Bush years felt vindicated by the defeat of 2008. Immigration restrictionists had a large presence at CPAC, bolstered by a new group, Young People for Western Civilization [sic -- actually Youth For Western Civilization], and the omnipresent former congressman Tom Tancredo and Team America PAC leader Bay Buchanan. At a launch party Friday night for the group, Tancredo was mobbed for photos as Peter Brimelow, editor of the immigration restrictionist web site VDare.com, huddled in a corner nursing a cough.

Brimelow, like Tancredo, scoffed at the idea that the Republican comeback would come when the party reached out to Hispanic voters. “Republicans fluctuate between disastrous and catastrophic with the Hispanic vote,” he said. “The problem that Republicans had was that they didn’t turn out the white vote, and they didn’t get as large a share of the white vote as they should have. What reason did McCain give them?”

This, of course, is what we at VDARE.COM call the Sailer Strategy. I hope to write more on CPAC later this week.

The answer to Steve Sailer’s question below “Why do we have “diminutive” lady cops anyway? “, is that it’s the fault of the courts and the $PLC. As I wrote in Guilty: The SPLC And The Atlanta Courtroom Massacre

Here’s the rest of the story: the policy of having short females as police officers is thanks to our old friends at the Southern Poverty Law Center—always concerned about the faintest hint of “discrimination,” never concerned about the public interest.

Here’s a list of the various decisions that led to female police officers being required by law to do the same job as an officer literally twice their size: Decision with Regard to Women, Affirmative Action and Law Enforcement.

One of the leading decisions in the SPLC’s campaign against common sense was the abolition of “Strength/physical fitness tests and requirements” for police officers in Dothard v. Rawlinson (1977).

The SPLC supported the 5′3″, 115 lb, Dianne Rawlinson in her attempt to become a correctional employee in Alabama:

“At trial, the Law Center argued that the height and weight requirements had no actual relationship to the job requirements, and 33% of women would be excluded from employment as prison guards and state troopers by the statutory height requirements and 22% by the minimum weight requirements.”

See also Civil Rights Law Doesn’t Care If You Die, for an examination of the larger question involved.

Marcus Epstein was on The Young Turks, an Air America program. They titled the YouTube version A Conversation About Race Goes Terribly Awry. That must be because no one has ever disagreed with them before. There’s a lot of discussion of it on their website, including a nomination for the coveted, highly prized Worst Person In The World award, awarded by the maniacal Keith Olbermann.

By the way, I assumed the program title was just a metaphor, that the kids who ran it were “Young Turks” in the dictionary sense of “an insurgent or a member of an insurgent group especially in a political party”, named after a pre-World War One student’s  movement in Turkey. But it turns out that the main guy is called Cenk Uygur, who is an actual young Turk, or Turkish-American, who is on record as denying the Armenian genocide in a college paper. [Historical Fact or Falsehood?, By Cenk Uygur, November 20, Daily Pennsylvanian, November 20,1991]

I haven’t listened to this yet, because I had the sound off on my computer, but I viewed it with the sound off, and you see Cenk Uygur in full, talking and waving his hands, and just a very blurry photograph of Marcus, who was being interviewed by phone.

David Simon, the creator of the HBO cop TV series “The Wire” complains in the Washington Post about a new Baltimore police policy of not releasing names of cops who shoot people unless the cops feel the shooting was unjustified (to prevent retaliation, ostensibly–which, indeed, is easier in the Internet age of looking up stuff about people):

On Feb. 17, when a 29-year-old officer responded to a domestic dispute in East Baltimore, ended up fighting for her gun and ultimately shot an unarmed 61-year-old man named Joseph Alfonso Forrest, the Sun reported the incident, during which Forrest died, as a brief item. It did not name the officer, Traci McKissick, or a police sergeant who later arrived at the scene to aid her and who also shot the man.

It didn’t identify the pair the next day, either, because the Sun ran no full story on the shooting, as if officers battling for their weapons and unarmed 61-year-old citizens dying by police gunfire are no longer the grist of city journalism. At which point, one old police reporter lost his mind and began making calls.

No, the police spokesman would not identify the officers, and for more than 24 hours he would provide no information on whether either one of them had ever been involved in similar incidents. And that’s the rub, of course. Without a name, there’s no way for anyone to evaluate an officer’s performance independently, to gauge his or her effectiveness and competence, to know whether he or she has shot one person or 10.

It turns out that McKissick — who is described as physically diminutive — had had her gun taken from her once before. In 2005, police sources said, she was in the passenger seat of a suspect’s car as the suspect, who had not been properly secured, began driving away from the scene. McKissick pulled her gun, the suspect grabbed for it and a shot was fired into the rear seat. Eventually, the suspect got the weapon and threw it out of the car; it was never recovered. Charges were dropped on the suspect, according to his defense attorney, Warren Brown, after Brown alleged in court that McKissick’s supervisors had rewritten reports, tailoring and sanitizing her performance.

And so on Feb. 17, the same officer may have again drawn her weapon only to find herself again at risk of losing the gun. The shooting may be good and legally justified, and perhaps McKissick has sufficient training and is a capable street officer. But in the new world of Baltimore, where officers who take life are no longer named or subject to public scrutiny, who can know?

Of course, my attention was diverted away from Mr. Simon’s no doubt worthy crusade to a question that just doesn’t get asked much these days: Why do we have “diminutive” lady cops anyway?

Officer McKissick is courageous — the previous time she lost control of her gun, it was after jumping into a car trying to speed away from an arrest — but she apparently doesn’t have the upper body strength to get her out of situations her bravery gets her into without shots getting fired.

As a general proposition, when a 29-year-old cop is so weak that she gets herself put into a headlock by a 61-year-old man, bad stuff is likely to ensue.