Who’s This?

Who’s this public persona during his college days, wearing his crewneck sweater high in the front, as we’ve analyzed before.

Shield your eyes from the comments below while you formulate your guess. I’m sure someone’s seen this image before. — CC

105 Comments on "Who’s This?"

  1. Shot in the dark. Bernie Sanders?

  2. Bernie Sanders

  3. Chewco L.P. (Offshore) | April 24, 2017 at 3:30 pm |

    Couldn’t guess so I cheated and searched for the image on Google. But nice find!

  4. It was obvious to me who it was, but that’s not really a crew-neck sweater. I’d call that a boat-neck.

  5. Mitchell S. | April 24, 2017 at 5:08 pm |

    I guessed Sanders.

    Does this have something to do with the election in France? Vote Macron!!! Liberte, Egalite, e Fraternite!

  6. This came up in the original post, with many suspicious that crewnecks could be worn that way. I vote that it’s just a bit old and stretched out from sleeping in (and protesting) and that it’s simply an affectation to wear it that way (see link in the post).

  7. Maybe those 2 gents stretched the collar a bit.

  8. I think it’s Bernie Sanders.
    I’m not sure you’re correct about the crew neck sweater though, looks like a boat neck sweater to me.

  9. Gerst Buyer | April 24, 2017 at 7:18 pm |

    It is a boat neck, not a crew neck worn high. Having lived through the era and having owned some, I assure you such is the case.

  10. I wrongly guessed Allen Ginsberg even though that wasn’t Columbia’s campus. Neat!

  11. Bernie Sanders in 1963, when he was a student and arrested in Chicago.

  12. But Gerst, in that link you agree that some guys are wearing a basic crewneck.

    I noticed Tiger Woods over the past couple of years has worn crewnecks in an unusual way, covering the front button of his polo shirt. This is the closest example I could find:


  13. The infamous high-front crewneck: the mark of a charlatan. At least in this case.

    Oh and if Macron wins, say goodbye to France as we know it. As if Paris isn’t bad enough…

  14. We’ve already said goodbye to the US as we knew it, GS.

  15. René Lebenthal | April 25, 2017 at 4:03 am |

    You might be right GS, but the other choce is Le Pen, which is worse …..

  16. That’s clearly a boatneck.

  17. @GS

    “The infamous high-front crewneck: the mark of a charlatan. At least in this case.

    Oh and if Macron wins, say goodbye to France as we know it. As if Paris isn’t bad enough…”

    Nonsense. The mark of a charlatan is of course a pencil moustache and a trilby hat.

    And should Madame le Pen win, say hello to a France that nobody will wish to know.

    Honestly, gentlemen. Can we avoid any rude comments about the sweater in the photo? Clearly it looks thick and rustic enough to have been knitted by the wearer’s Granny, and as such probably holds a dear place in his heart…

  18. I agree with Tom.

    That’s a boatneck.

  19. If Mme Le Pen wins, I fear my lonsmen may have to say goodbye to France as they know it.

  20. I think some people feel that France as we know it is no longer France as we know it.

    I came up with a wisecrack on election night, but it’s not PC so I didn’t tweet it out for fear of having my life ruined.

    But what the hell, it’s just a joke:

    “They used to say Beirut was the Paris of the Middle East. Now Paris is the Paris of the Middle East.”

  21. Nothing is what it used to be. Time marches on. Pretending otherwise is best left to Hasidim, Amish, and Salafis.

  22. Certainly true, but interesting quote coming from the most sentimentally nostalgic man I’ve ever met! And believe me, it takes one to know one.

  23. Mr. Press,

    With respect, please give your opinion why so many Jewish people feel that liberals (socialists and communists-who are regarded as conservative in Europe) have the Jewish peoples best interest at heart. For the life of me I do not understand.

    Paris IS a major Islamic state and tweeting a joke CAN ruin a reputation or a life. Both of those conditions are born of liberalism and, in my opinion, are retrograde to all people, especially Jews.

    Mr. Sanders is wearing a boat neck by the way.


  24. Incidentally, Macron looks like the kind of guy who wears Gucci bid loafers in my opinion. Also, his made up political party, for which I believe he is the only member, is En Marche! The exclamation point worked well for Jeb! pretty well too. Frenchmen on the march is also very intimidating. I’m looking for a safe place as we speak.


  25. FrontPorchLife | April 25, 2017 at 12:54 pm |

    Boat necks do not look appealing at all.

  26. Nevertheless, apparently we need to do a post on them.

  27. Macron is a centrist. He is a liberal in the European sense, like Nick Clegg or Angela Merkel.

    Le Pen is the daughter of a Holocaust denier.

    About 10% of Parisians are moslem. For perspective, roughly the same proportion of New Yorkers are Jewish.

  28. Henry Contestwinner | April 25, 2017 at 2:06 pm |

    I’m sure it isn’t, but the sweater in the picture looks as though it were made of…


  29. Merkel is a leftist in the American sense of the word.
    The quality of Muslims matters most and I don’t think there are a lot of Jewish people terrorizing New York. Not sure 10 percent is right.
    Regarding le Pen’s father, maybe it is true and maybe not. Consider the source.


  30. Will, I do agree that Trump has pulled this country so far right that even the center-right Christian Democrats seem left wing by our standards.

    The source for Le Pen’s holocaust-denial would be the French and German court systems, which have both convicted and fined him. As I was looking for an old article reporting on those convictions, I saw that, just yesterday, the President of Israel condemned Marine herself for holocaust denial. So I will just post that instead.


    I suppose you’ll say Likud are just a bunch of hippies.

  31. Mr. Contestwinner, what say you of the current state of France?

    Also, that would have been a legendary tweet, Christian. Sadly true.

  32. Speaking of boatneck sweaters, isn’t the infamous Dartmouth 1968 sweater from Take Ivy a boatneck? That’s a handsome sweater.

  33. Are the people who deny the Holocaust the same as the ones who deny the Earth is round?

  34. More often than not they are. In the skeptic community, there is this concept called “crank magnetism.” Generally, adherents to one conspiracy theory tend to be attracted to others. Holocaust deniers tend to overlap with flat earthers, birthers, 9/11 truthers, anti-vaxxers, pizzagaters, gamergaters, global warming deniers, moon landing deniers, NWO/illuminati nuts, tax protesters, sovereign citizens, etc.

    Belief in one conspiracy does not imply belief in all, but it usually implies belief in others. Jill Stein, for example, does not believe in global warming conspiracies, but is a truther, anti-vax, anti-gmo, and bought into all sorts of Clinton cinspiracy theories. She is essentially Donald Trump without the racism, sexism or global warming denial.

    If someone peddles one conspiracy, you should be skeptical of anything else they say.

  35. @Jerry

    You sound like a man who will believe anything that will suit your purpose when you include Bill and Hillary Clinton. Also, isn’t Jill Stein the goof ball who called for a mulligan on the presidential election and ended up increasing Trump’s lead in certain states?

    I don’t believe in man made global warming and I know that some of the Clinton conspiracies are true because they have been proven to be true. Hey, if we were in Europe, I would be tried and fined for thought crimes.


  36. Pardon, @James


  37. Will,

    I think you may have just proved his point.

  38. Mr. Press,

    France was under the control of Germany after they so cowardly surrendered ten weeks after the beginning of the battle of France. I don’t think you have provided evidence that the Le Pen’s have denied that the holocaust happen, only that the people of the time, and not the France in general were responsible. I believe in holding people responsible and not faceless entities.

    That the French and German courts would convict and fine somebody for thinking a certain thing is very scary to me. It should be to you as well. And what right would Germany have in a trial regarding the holocaust?

    Referring to Trump as a right-winger is funny since he was a registered democrat for the longest time and his kids and son in law still are.

    The Likud are not hippies and I have the utmost respect for Israel. I dated a beautiful Jeenjit back in the early ’90s who was a hell of a shot with a rifle. As a kid, my dad gave me a poster of Moshe Dayan that read “Hire the handicapped.” A true bad ass.


  39. Well, if you don’t believe in holding countries liable for actions of the past, then Germany would have as much right as anyone in a trial on the holocaust.

    I don’t think Le Pen was prosecuted for thought crime. He was prosecuted for spreading falsehoods. I suppose you agree with Stalin. Slander against one person is a crime, slander against 6 million is just a statistic.

  40. Christian,

    Thought this might appeal to you. Sebastian Gorka made an appearance at Georgetown on Monday. Instead of protesting his appearance, students just showed up and asked him questions about his credentials until he had a temper tantrum and stormed off. Positive developments!


  41. Positive indeed! That should prove to students that they can allow people they don’t like to speak, and then take them down properly, rather than shut the whole thing down in advance.

    Somehow I don’t think Ann Coulter at Berkeley tomorrow will go down quite the same way.

  42. Mr. Press

    Prosecuted and fined by governments for spreading falsehoods. My goodness, that sounds like thought crime to me. Also, invoking the name Stalin, Hitler, Mao et al. is a flimsy way to try to make a point. Incidentally, they were all socialists and communists, not capitalists or democratic republicans.

    I also find it unfortunate that any private person, politician or government would use the six plus millions who were murdered in the concentration camps to score political points.


  43. Just to recap Will’s points so far:

    (1) No country is responsible for its war crimes.
    (2) Fraud and Slander should be legal.
    (3) Pizzagate is real.
    (4) Donald Trump, Adolp Hitler and Angela Merkel are all crypto-leftists. (Interestingly, this poses a paradox that Will voted for a crypto-leftist. Is Will a crypto-leftist, or was he just duped?)

    Am I missing anything?

  44. @James

    1. Countries are made up of people. The people involved in war crimes should be held responsible for war crimes. Should my young child be held responsible for…say… American slavery? Slavery is alive and well in the world but not in this country. We are exceptional in that and many other regards. Wouldn’t you agree?

    2. Fraud and slander is the mothers milk of liberalism. I do not wish to make liberalism illegal. I will fight it though.

    3. I had to look up pizzagate. You are showing that you are not a serious person with that one. Ridiculous.

    4. Hitler and Merkel are, without a doubt, socialists. As far as Donald Trump and my voting for him. He was the lesser of two evils. Government, after all, is a necessary evil. Given the choice, I would pick limited government over anarchy. I am, however, pleased with many of the things he has accomplished in the last one hundred days. Pleasantly surprised. I was a Cruz man.

    BB 3/2 blazer today with white oxford and Bill’s Khakis. Green and blue rep tie and Alden long wings. Engine turned Trafalgar belt.


  45. So now that we’ve established that you think fraud and slander are perfectly acceptable, let’s test the limits of your ideological commitment. What about criminal conspiracy?

    Let’s say I publish your name, photo and address in Virginia Beach on a website. I let everyone know what a truly awful person you are and then invite them to shoot you in your little cueball head. I note that, if you die, I will donate $100k to the DNC, which is protected speech, after all.


  46. Can we set a good example to the children and discuss opposing views without hypothetical shootings in the head?

  47. Proceed with caution, James.


  48. James, freedom of speech does not protect the incitation of violence. That is not slander, nor is holding the belief that the Holocaust did not happen. As ludicrous as the belief in Holocaust denial is, people have the right to believe what they so choose.

    Also, look how well holding Germany, the country, responsible for WWI worked out. Why, it worked out so well that it led to WWII.

  49. GS

    On the other hand look how well holding Germany accountable after WW II at the Nuremberg Trials turn out.


    Truely unfortunate that in 2017 in the USA there are still people who do not understand the danger in defending ignorant demogoues who miss state historical facts for political gains.


    I think the point you were making was that at some point speech can become action that can cause devastating results. For example, knowingly falsely shouting fire in a crowded theater.

  50. Anyone can believe whatever they want. Nobody cares about that. The question is about publishing false and harmful statements.

    Here’s a less violent example and one that correlates a little more closely with holocaust denial. Let’s say that I believe that GS was expelled from Marist College for raping another student. That is a positive concept and can be proven or disproven. You would really just need to get some records from the school.

    Now let’s say that I start a website dedicated to letting the whole world know that GS is a convicted rapist. I’m entitled to my beliefs and others are free to inquire with the college as to whether GS actually was convicted and expelled. Is my website problematic?

  51. Mr.Press,

    What do you make of this James fellow?


  52. Mr. Korn, in the case of the Nuremberg Trials, individual people, Nazis, were held accountable for their actions, or lack thereof. The country of Germany was crippled financially after being forced to pay reparations for WWI which in turn helped Hitler rise to power.

    James, I am flattered that you took the time to search for me on Facebook but I find your comparisons disturbing. However, I see nothing that crosses the line of acceptable free speech your dramatic example. It would be akin to the many allegations of rape that Bill Clinton has under his belt. Whether they are true or not is not important, what is important is that we have the right to investigate the matter. I believe that freedom of speech ends where the incitation of violence begins.

    Will, what do you make of this James fellow?

  53. That should be “…in your dramatic example…” pardon the error.

  54. James


    If GS were a public figure then it does not matter whether or not the information on your website is true or false

    If GS is not a public figure and the information on your website is false then your website could present an expensive legal problem for you.

    Your example is not helpful because it pertains to information about an individual rather than a false historical fact.

    In the interests of free speech the right of a person to espouse false historical facts should be legal protected. This places a moral obligation on the members of a free society to expose the false facts and show the danger in believing that kind of garbage.

  55. GS

    At the Nuremberg trials people were held responsible for their actions not their failure to act.

    Mankind as a whole has condemned and held the citizens of Nazis Germany who failed to oppose the regime accountable for their lack of action.

  56. Mr. Korn, by saying “lack thereof” I was referring to the testimonies given by certain Nazis who claimed to be simply “following orders.” This theory was put to a test as the infamous Milgram Experiment. The difference in the punishment of Germany after WWI and WWII was that in the first war the country and its people, many of whom were innocent, were punished by being forced to pay for the war. After WWII the Nazis were held solely responsible, as they alone should have been. I do not believe that the citizens of Germany who had no military position should have been punished and I do not believe they were. They were sheep but were not carrying out orders of the Nazis.

  57. GS

    They were not sheep. They were men and women that had a moral and ethical obligation to oppose Hitler and his government. I do believe they were punished. Their country was in physical and financial ruins at the end of war; and their country was conquered and occupied. Not to mention half the country being subject to communist rule for decades. If that’s not punishment, I don’t know what is.

  58. I’m not a legal scholar, so I’m not sure if James has a point or not.

    I do still think that Marine Le Pen is an anti-Semite and that sacksuit and GS are being anti-Semitic apologists by defending her statements.

    Here’s another example of why Jews are hesitant to embrace the current right wing nationalist agenda: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/9/ted-nugent-blames-jews-gun-control-facebook-posts/

    This man was recently a guest at the white house.

  59. Mr. Korn I’ll agree with you that living under communism was a great punishment but I do believe that most Germans who happened to support the Nazis “woke up” after the war. I feel that these people were swept up by rhetoric but these people were just citizens they didn’t commit actual crimes.

    Mr. Press I am not an anti-Semite or an “anti-Semite apologist” I just believe that people have the right to hold their own beliefs. I am not defending her statements simply her right to make such statements and hold such beliefs. That does not mean I agree with them. Also Ted Nugent is a lout and a conspiracy theorist who doesn’t represent the president.

  60. Mr. Press,

    A surprising answer for which you should be ashamed. I should have thought that the suggestion of a hit on somebody with whom you disagree would be worthy of a stronger response.

    As I stated before, I have nothing but respect and love for the Jewish people and think deniers of the Holocaust to be fools. Ted Newgent is a washed up fool.

    Disappointedly, Will

  61. GS, you weren’t just standing up for Marine Le Pen’s right to her beliefs. You were arguing that she is the only hope to preserve France as we know it. In her view, preserving France as we know it requires Jews to give up their right to wear yarmulkes or maintain kosher diets.

    And if Ted Nugent doesn’t represent the President, he at least emblematic of right wing nationalists.

    Will, I think you are taking what seem to be rhetorical arguments too seriously.

  62. Will, don’t be such a cry-bully. These are hypotheticals I use in teaching first amendment jurisprudence.

  63. Mr. Press I meant Le Pen is a hope for France to stop the influx of migrants who are changing the face of the country. I was unaware of her stance on yarmulkes. I just did some research and found out that she has spoken about banning all religious attire from public spaces (including muslims) not singling out the Jewish people. I found nothing that supports your claim that she would ban kosher food or stop people from keeping a kosher diet. I do not agree with her idea of an attire ban but I feel that she would be good as far as stopping the provenly dangerous migrants, who have been known to target Jews as well. Macron has heralded Merkel’s immigration policy which is horrifying as we see the insidious effects of mass immigration in France and Germany.

  64. Ted Nugent is an annoying provocateur and the president invited him to the White House because he is a supporter. That does not mean that the two share the same views. I do not believe that the president is an anti-Semite.

  65. James

    Do you teach undergraduates or law students? I was taught that the criminal conspiracy statute was a Prosecutor’s most powerful weapon; but this was before “RICCO”.

  66. GS

    Regarding Ted Nugent and the President. There is an old saying — If you lay down with dogs, you get fleas.

  67. http://www.jta.org/2017/04/25/news-opinion/world/marine-le-pen-ban-halal-and-all-ritual-slaughter

    What was your stance on Obama’s invitation of controversial rappers to the White House?

  68. Another thing to debate: many on the left have chided their peers who have said they would meet with Trump. Steve Harvey, for example:


    So I guess the lying down with dogs works both ways.

    I’m guessing that reaction was largely from the shock of his taking office and that over the course of four years those who oppose him will be more likely to meet with him if it is advantageous to their cause.

  69. Mr. Korn I like that saying but I don’t think Nugent will influence the president.

    Mr. Press I don’t think it was a good idea but they supported him and that’s probably why he invited them, never said having Nugent to the WH was a good idea as it sends a bad message. I don’t agree with LePen’s religious limitations but she appears to be anti-religion on the whole.

  70. GS

    Is it all right to be “to be anti-religion on the whole”? Put another way is it all right to limit the free exercise of religion by all people as long as you do not limit the free exercise of religion by one religious group?

  71. No I do not agree with her stance on religion but I do not believe that she is singling out the Jewish people. I only agree with her stance on immigration as I believe that it is vital to insure the future of France for the French people.

  72. CC

    What is good for the goose is good for the gander. Yes. I think it works both ways.

  73. As we know France has had a very secular culture for a long time and considers religion to be “a private matter.”

    Those both for and against Muslim immigration seem to be using that same point.

  74. The ever-pleasant and sensible (also gay and Jewish and liberal, for those keeping score) Dave Rubin has a new video on campus free speech that addresses one of those wacky Holocaust deniers (who, in this case, happened to be transsexual) and how to deal with someone with nutty beliefs in a civilized manner:


  75. I love Dave Rubin, he’s doing God’s work simply by being sensible.

  76. “Without freedom of thought, there can be no such thing as wisdom – and no such thing as public liberty without freedom of speech. ” Benjamin Franklin

  77. Goy Orbison | April 27, 2017 at 11:56 pm |

    Whenever Peanut Butter goes on a rant about limited government, it reminds me of Lee Atwater’s summation of the southern strategy:

    You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can’t say “nigger”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nigger, nigger.”

  78. Got Orbison | April 28, 2017 at 1:01 am |

    Also, it should be noted that Le Pen is the real commie in the French election. She supports nationalization of most industries, including banks. She wants to raise corporate tax rates because they are unfairly low compared to what workers pay, although she wants an exception for worker owned and profit-sharing companies that run like communes. She supports gay marriage and abortion. She wants to abolish religion from all public view. Her boyfriend and deputy is a jew. She is way to the left of Bernie Sanders, except on the issue of immigration. But you stupid cucks are ready to throw the baby out with the bath water all because your peabrains can’t recognize socialism when it grabs you by the pussy.

    The cultural marxists aren’t winning. They already won by convincing you they lost. We are all doomed.

  79. That escalated quickly

  80. I don’t even know what to say about the above, but here is a question that is bothering me. If GS and sacksuit believe that only individuals are responsible for their actions and that responsibility for those actions should not be impugned upon that individual’s countrymen, why is a blanket ban on immigration from specific Arab countries acceptable in response to the actions of individuals who share the ethnicity or religion of those countries?

  81. Mr. Press,

    We are at least in agreement about the above. The answer to your question, however, is simple. Those countries are state sponsors of terrorism. An innocent woman who is forced to live life in a burka in Syria or a child in Yemen will probably never commit terrorism in this country. It is unfair that they should be grouped together with the rest of the population of those countries but life has never been fair. The vast majority of muslims are not affected by the ban, which by the way, is perfectly legal under the constitution. The safety and security of this country is crucial to the safety and security of the world. We should probably ban all immigration to this country to allow for assimilation and to get rid of the bad apples as was the case from the 1920’s through the 1960’s.

    Since these people believe that Jews, women, homosexuals or anybody else who isn’t full bore with the program are subject to death, I ask the original question again, why do so many Jewish people believe and vote against their own interests so often?



  82. Sack Suit

    Why are you so afraid of immigrants. Are you afraid to enconmically compete with immigrants? Are you afraid of people with different customs and attitudes? Are you just a bigoted racist who hates anyone that is different? I am not trying to insult you. I am just trying to understand your position. Please explain what you mean by threat to the safety and security of our country from immigrants. We have police. We have the FBI. We have the NSA. We even have the Patorit Act. I await your response.

  83. Mr. Press firstly, do you not believe that individuals are responsible for their own actions? Secondly, the Obama administration identified the countries from which immigrants are banned as major terrorist producing nations. At the moment, we lack a sufficient screening process so taking in these people is an unwanted and unnecessary risk. The US has had its borders closed in the past and frankly I believe we should close them now. We are letting in far too many immigrants, we need to let the current ones settle and assimilate before taking in any more. We would be stupid to allow these migrants in as we see the havoc they have and continue to wreak in Europe. Are you really unaware of what they have done in Germany, France and Sweden?

  84. Mr. Korn, the culture of these migrants and our culture do not gel. Homosexuals, Jews and women should be afraid of these people as they are notoriously intolerant and hateful of them. Not only have they not assimilated in the countries where they have been welcomed but they have caused destruction. I am for legal immigration of people from countries that don’t hate America or people who are willing to adopt American culture as immigrants should. Yes we have various forms of internal protection for Americans but why do we need to take these people in? We have the right to refuse to take in immigrants for any reason, this is an organized country not just a land mass. Again, have you seen what they have been doing in Europe? A skirmish in Paris alone seemingly every other day. As a country, we are under no obligation to take any people in.

  85. I agree that sack and gs are anti-Semite apologists… at best. This forum is getting uglier – one I’m less inclined to visit.

  86. How am I am anti-Semite apologist? What an unfair accusation. I defended free speech, which includes the right to say and believe whatever you want. I do not agree with anti-Semitism.

  87. @GS

    They are being willfully ignorant. Have a good weekend. I am at the beach with my family and friends and a large cooler of Modela.



  88. @H Korn

    Just saw message from last night. Perhaps you should fix yourself a gin and tonic and put on an Allman Brothers record lest you come completely unhinged.


  89. First thong sighting of the year and a good one. Early this year too.


  90. Sack, did you say hi to him?

  91. About time someone lightened things up with a wisecrack!

    Hah, “crack.” There goes another one!

  92. I am sure Sack said hello — unless the guy was an immigrant. Forgive me, it must be the gin and tonic I had at Sack’s suggestion. This is what happens when a scotch man varies from the beaten path.

  93. Back at the beach. Hey, I’m drinking Mexican beer, what do you want from me?


  94. GS,

    “The culture of these migrants and our culture do not gel.”

    Doesn’t sound like you are judging them as individuals as you insist on judging the French and Germans.


    I’m not asking about Moslems. I am asking about nationality. You said we should give the French and Germans the benefit of the doubt in regards to atrocities committed by their countrymen and judge them as individuals. Why not afford the same courtesy to Mexicans and Syrians?

    As far as Jewish reluctance to embrace Marine Le Pen, she flirts closely with holocaust denial and has proposed laws that would essentially outlaw Judaism in France. It’s one thing to outlaw yarmulkes in public schools. Observant Jews could still send their children to religious schools. However, if yarmulkes in public and kosher slaughter are outlawed, it would interfere with two central components of Jewish practice.

    We also remember what it was like to be treated as unwelcome outsiders. Are you familiar with the poem “First they came…” by Martin Niemoller?

    Beyond any point on Arabs, I don’t recall Mexicans perpetrating any particular atrocities against Jews.

  95. Mr. Press,

    I do believe everybody should be regarded as individuals. A young person from France or Germany or anywhere else for that matter should not be pre-judged as guilty by the sins of their fathers, no matter how atrocious. Do you feel guilty because of American slavery. A civil war was fought to end.

    An article in Jewish news stated that Le Pen’s suggestion to ban religious garb is one of equal treatment so as not to single out muslims. That may or may not be true. I cannot understand the slaughter practices being banned.

    I am familiar with the Niemoller work. Remember, it was the communists and socialists who did the rounding up.

    Your Mexican mistreatment of Jews just seems jejune at best.


  96. You have done a lot of whining about anti-Christian laws in the US. Your complacency toward proposed anti-Jewish or anti-Moslem laws reveals a very deep hypocrisy.

    Your insistence that Hitler was a leftist and is somehow ideologically similar to Merkel or Macron is Trumpian in its disregard for truth and logic.

    You still have not presented any reason why we shouldn’t judge each immigrant as an individual. And you especially haven’t presented any reason for restricting immigrants from Mexico.

    Nothing you have posted on this site over the years, political or not, has shown you are anything other than a chnyokish shtunk.

  97. Mr. Press

    I think shtik drek shtunk is more appropiate.

  98. sacksuit | May 3, 2017 at 6:32 pm |

    I’ve moved on gentleman.

    Peace be with you.


  99. Every sensible person knows what Marine le Pen is, and engaging in extended debate over supposed nuances in her publicly acknowledged policies is an insult to intelligence. As for nativists like Will and GS in our country, I am happy to trade them for new Americans chosen at random from visa applicants from anywhere in the world. The culture of these nativists and American culture do not gel.

  100. Fascinating! American nativists and American culture don’t gel!

    One of the most interesting comments ever left here.

  101. Did we ever decide if this was a boat-neck or crew sweater? I couldn’t tell.

  102. Speaking of that Niemoller poem, it’s interesting how the free speech brigade doesn’t seem worked up about Desiree Fairooz.

    Also, Dave Rubin is a glorified concern troll.

Comments are closed.