Because, as Coulter says “we don’t think humans are special because they are smart.”

Ann Coulter is not a part of Carolina Review. Ann Coulter is not a leader in our organization. Ann Coulter is not linked to Carolina Review in any way except that she flipped through our magazine once. Michelle Malkin hasn’t even done that and as far as I know doesn’t even know that we exist.

“You learn in basic rhetoric not to use an argument that your opponent can use also: I definitely haven’t heard Kevin DeAnna or YWC suggesting that black people are genetically inferior to white people.”

I again refer you to the Epstein Young Turks segment. Anyone who is still reading this can watch it and decide for themselves.

Did you not read the quotes that I provided? Maybe they were a little long for you, so I’ll quote the most relevant passage:

“Contrary to the party line denying that such a thing as IQ existed, the book
methodically demonstrated that IQ exists, it is easily measured, it is heritable, AND IT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.” (emphasis mine)

If IQ is so important, and there are racial differences in IQ, then why is VDARE wrong in using IQ/IQ differences in informing and guiding public policy? Also, did you not click on the link in which Ms. Coulter quotes Peter Brimelow as an authority (http://www.vdare.com/pb/060524_coulter.htm)? My point in asking these question is to show that she is in agreement with VDARE.

“Please note that I do not like Ann Coulter at all, and am also not a fan of Michelle Malkin.”

Oh, okay. But you don’t matter. The Carolina Review nevertheless has links to both of them, regardless of what you think of them now that you actually have been exposed to a little real research. This, by the way, is an example of your ignorance. Informed people do not run into this kind of trap, because they have all their facts straight before they open their traps.

“As for CR’s double standard, that logic doesn’t work. I definitely haven’t heard Bryan Weynand suggesting that black people are genetically inferior to white people and I know for a fact that he would never write for a website like Vdare.com.”

You learn in basic rhetoric not to use an argument that your opponent can use also: I definitely haven’t heard Kevin DeAnna or YWC suggesting that black people are genetically inferior to white people. (As a matter of fact, if I’m not mistaken, the president of YWC at MIT is black. The #2 person in national YWC is Hispanic. Marcus Epstein never definitively stated any opinion that suggests that blacks are inferior to whites in intelligence. If you don’t believe me, then e-mail him and find out. Nowhere in that video does Marcus make any such definitive or definite statement. Contact me if you want his contact info.) And although I can’t guarantee that Kevin would never write for VDARE, I’m not concerned about that because it’s clear that he would be in good company if he did.

The fact of the matter is, Chris, that you simply are only scratching the surface in terms of controversial connections in the conservative movement. (This, again, proves your ignorance.) Just like in the liberal and neo-conservative movements, or in any political movement at all, there are going to be “skeletons” if that’s what you want to call them. That doesn’t mean that everyone in a given movement is evil incarnate, nor does it mean that everyone in the given movement is the same as everyone else in said movement. This is why I don’t blame Barack Obama for his “connection” to Bill Ayers–Ayers is an even uglier member of the leftist movement, but that doesn’t make Obama a terrorist.

While it’s admirable that you consider yourself an independent thinker (I consider myself the same), I’d like to note again that you write for the Carolina Review, the “journal of conservative thought and opinion published at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.” You are therefore not as free as you might think. You have linked yourself to a self-proclaimed conservative organization that has clear links to “skeletons.” You have therefore linked yourself to said “skeletons.” If you don’t like that, then you do have several options. You can leave the Carolina Review and renounce it. You can persuade the Carolina Review to sever its ties with and renounce Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin and any other controversial figure to whom the Carolina Review might be linked, and the Carolina Review could adopt a policy of only linking itself to saints, saints, of course, canonized by the liberal status quo (this would end up destroying the Carolina Review as a conservative publication, of course).

If the Carolina Review doesn’t officially and publicly sever themselves from, for instance, Ann Coulter, then they ought to take down Chris’ blog “Virulently anti-Immigrant Student Group Forms at UNC – UPDATED” and all such statements as the following: “I also must concede that there are questions about some of the figures involved with the organization at the national level and their involvement with racist organizations.” (Bryan Weynand) PERIOD. It would be highly dishonest and unfair if the Carolina Review does not take action in this circumstance.

You are defining “genuine conservatives” as people that agree with you, and people that don’t agree with you aren’t genuine conservatives. This is a No True Scotsman fallacy.

2. You are taking Epstein out of context. He was quoting Watson as a source that supported the view he was proposing as a possible reason for his ridiculous statement that “blacks do less well than whites in whatever country they are found in.” Anyone can listen to the interview and decide for themselves: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yV4ppLfliTQ

As for Ann Coulter, please note that Coulter is drawing opposite conclusions: She says yes, racial IQ differences are real but they don’t matter because people are worth more than their intelligence. The folks at VDare argue that racial IQ differences should inform and guide public policy. Big difference.

Please note that I do not like Ann Coulter at all, and am also not a fan of Michelle Malkin.

As for CR’s double standard, that logic doesn’t work. I definitely haven’t heard Bryan Weynand suggesting that black people are genetically inferior to white people and I know for a fact that he would never write for a website like Vdare.com.

There’s a lot more on Ms. Coulter that I could provide, but a simple internet-search
would suffice. Or go to Wikipedia and search for her.

It seems that the Carolina Review respects Ms. Coulter very much:
http://www.unc.edu/cr/archive/2009_04.pdf

That’s not the only link I could provide.

So, if YWC has links to “racist” organizations, so does the Carolina Review–even more
overt links, as a matter of fact.

“The signs accusing YWC of being white supremacist appeared before I began researching
the organization.

“At first, I thought the signs were an unfounded accusation. Then, I started doing
research and found that it was actually true.” –Chris Jones

“The national leadership of YWC?s links to racist organizations have already been
documented on this site, and I do not feel that they require continual re-posting every
time we make a post with the acronym ?YWC? in it. I also don?t feel like I need to argue
why this is both intolerant and morally offensive.” –Chris Jones

So, by your own standards, Chris, the Carolina Review is also a white supremacist
organization.

“I concede that YWC advocates for a limit on immigration that some may interpret to be
racist (no one at the Carolina Review, however). I concede that they advocate for the
cultural superiority of the United States, which again some may interpret as racist. I
also must concede that there are questions about some of the figures involved with the
organization at the national level and their involvement with racist organizations.”
–Bryan Weynand

This directly contradicts what Chris Jones said not only in the first of his above quoted
statements, but also here: “Your group espouses ideologies are a deeply morally
offensive. That is why they must be opposed.”

The Carolina Review, although I think that most of its staff are good people, needs to
reign in Chris Jones. He is making statements that are not only false, but also are
convicting the Carolina Review of the same things that he is accusing YWC of. I hereby
request that the Carolina Review remove Chris’ blog titled “Virulently anti-Immigrant
Student Group Forms at UNC – UPDATED” and all such statements as the following: “I also
must concede that there are questions about some of the figures involved with the
organization at the national level and their involvement with racist organizations.”
(Bryan Weynand) And, of course, Chris needs to be reprimanded for his shoddy journalism
and his smear campaign, which involved either countless slanders against YWC or verdicts
against the Carolina Review.

And what about Ann Coulter? In this article, Ms. Coulter quotes who other than Peter
Brimelow as an authority: http://www.vdare.com/pb/060524_coulter.htm Ms. Coulter has
basically openly embraced the arguments presented in the book “The Bell Curve:
Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life”:

“When Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray’s book “The Bell Curve: Intelligence and
Class Structure in American Life” landed on the shelves in 1994, liberals responded with
their usual open-mindedness to scientific facts. The 850-page book represented eight
years of collaboration between Herrnstein, a Harvard psychology professor, and Murray, a
political scientist. “The Bell Curve” synthesized mountains of data culled mostly from
the National Longitudinal Study of Youth (NLSY), a federal study testing the intelligence
of more than 10,000 Americans beginning in 1980, with regular follow-ups for many years
thereafter. Contrary to the party line denying that such a thing as IQ existed, the book
methodically demonstrated that IQ exists, it is easily measured, IT IS HERITABLE, and it
is extremely important.” (emphasis mine) (pp. 172-173 “Godless”)

“Liberals were afraid of A BOOK THAT TOLD THE TRUTH ABOUT IQ because they are godless
secularists who do not believe humans are in God’s image. Christians have no fear of
hearing FACTS ABOUT GENETIC DIFFERENCES IN IQ because we don’t think humans are special
because they are smart. There may be some advantages to being intelligent, but a lot of
liberals appear to have high IQs, so, really, what’s the point? After Hitler carried the
secularists’ philosophy to its bloody conclusion, liberals became terrified of making any
comment that seems to acknowledge that there are any differences among groups of
people–especially racial groups.” (emphasis mine) (p. 175 “Godless”)

[Let it be recognized for the record that I do not agree with Ann Coulter, Dr. Watson,
"The Bell Curve," etc. I only bring this up to point out the double standard of Chris,
and possibly the double standard of the Carolina Review.]

“About the justice of the causes for which Britain fought, few quarrel. And those years
from 1914 to 1918 and 1939 and 1945 produced days of glory that will forever inspire men
and reflect greatly upon the British people. Generations may pass away, but men will yet
talk of Passchendaele and the Somme, of Dunkirk and El Alamein. Two-thirds of a century
later, men’s eyes yet mist over at the words “Fighter Command,” and men and boys in their
Hurricanes and Spitfires who rose day after day as the knights of old in the Battle of
Britain to defend their “island home.” ” (Introduction xix)

“For their crimes, HITLER AND HIS COLLABORATORS, TODAY’S METAPHORS FOR ABSOLUTE EVIL,
RECEIVED THE RUTHLESS JUSTICE THEY DESERVED. … FOR WORLD WAR II WAS THE WORST EVIL EVER
TO BEFALL CHRISTIANS AND JEWS…” (emphasis mine) (Introduction xxi)

Does he honestly sound like a Neo-Nazi? Only a complete moron would believe so–are you
catching my drift, Chris?

2. Marcus Epstein.

You have taken Mr. Epstein’s words out of context. He was actually reporting a statement
by Dr. James Watson. Anyone care to guess who he is? That’s right, he is one of the
discoverers of the double-helix structure of DNA. Not that Marcus agrees, and not that I
agree, with Dr. Watson, but it’s a sad day when you can’t discuss a statement of Dr.
Watson about DNA. That’s all Marcus was doing–noting that Dr. Watson had discussed DNA
differences between the races and that we shouldn’t just dismiss his opinions on DNA
because they’re politically incorrect. Again, I want to make clear that Marcus and I both
disagree with Dr. Watson, but his opinions at least deserve to be discussed. That’s all
Marcus was doing.

1. Pat Buchanan.

http://buchanan.org/blog/pjb-the-true-haters-1495 My defense for this link is simply to
have the readers click on the link and read the WHOLE article, not just Chris’ convenient
quotes taken out of context. You make your own decision. Questions you might want to ask
yourself are, for example: “Does Mr. Buchanan support Nazism?” “What’s the point that
he’s trying to make with this article?” etc. If you have one shred of intelligence, you
will realize that this in no way is a defense of the Nazis–quite the opposite, as a
matter of fact.

As far as Mr. Buchanan’s appearance on Political Cesspool is concerned, so what? He also
plugged that same book on Hannity and Colmes. He is a regular commentator for MSNBC, a
far left cable news network. For that matter, he commonly appears on The Rachel Maddow
Show–does he agree with her simply because he appears on her show? Rachel Maddow is one
of the most liberal people on cable news right now. Why does Mr. Buchanan support her
show by appearing on it? Why does he give legitimacy to her by having discussions with
her, even though she is obviously unfair and bigoted against the right? Using your logic,
Chris, Mr. Buchanan is also a liberal, feminist, Barack Obama supporter for appearing on
Rachel Maddow’s show.

The fact of the matter is that Mr. Buchanan is highly respected and supported by genuine
conservatives, i.e., not hard-core neo-conservatives. Even Sean Hannity, who is extremely
in favor of the Iraq War, is highly respectful to and supportive of Mr. Buchanan, a
strong and outspoken critic of the War. While Mr. Buchanan is much more traditional than
the average conservative, he is nevertheless highly respected in the movement as a whole.