Can anyone doubt...—?

[Custer Laststand]

Well. It's morning in America, as a well-known president famously declared. Only this time, 5 Nov. 2008, it really is.

Can anyone who watched the expressions of adoration on the faces of the *huge* numbers of white women in the audience during President Elect Obama's victory speech doubt there will be a continuing and substantial increase during the next 4 years in the numbers of white married women taking black men as lovers? And in the numbers of white single women taking black men as their husbands?

Perhaps the resulting increase in the white cuckold population will cause a corresponding increase in the influence of the cuckold vote. Perhaps in the future, aspiring politicians — women and men of all races — will find it essential to openly court the cuckold vote, if they wish to stand a reasonable chance of being elected....

—Custer

 

[Susan's Slave]

I did hear one commentator say that now that Obama was getting advise from Bill Clinton his wife Michelle must be getting very worried!

 

[Custer Laststand]

On the other hand, Ms. Michelle is a *really* hot-looking woman.... perhaps Obama should be worried....

 

[Custer Laststand]

MacNfries,

Probably so, and might we also expect it to coincide over the next 48 months with an abnormal increase in illegitimate kids, particularly bi-racial, and 13-15 years later with a noticable increase in crime? But then again that may be a positive, because it will create new jobs (building more prisons) and put more people back to work. Right?

I don't think so. This point is addressed in "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner (2005, HarperCollins Publishers, 242 pp). See chapt's. 3 ("Why do drug dealers still live with their moms?") and 4 ("Where have all the criminals gone?").

Briefly, the authors — both are economists — argue (convincingly, in my opinion) that the precipitous drop in the U.S. crime rate that began around 1990 was mostly a result of the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, which established... as I'm sure you know... that American women have a constitutional right to abortion. They also argue that the dramatic drop in the crime rate that began around 1990 was either not a function at all, or at most only marginally a function, of the other societal reasons that were put forward to account for it.

The reason for this, Levitt and Dubner point out, is that unwanted children have a higher probability of growing up to become criminals than children who are wanted, and thus are more properly cared for by their parents. Around 1990, a much larger fraction of the unwanted children who would otherwise have become ~17 and would thus have been starting lives of crime did not do so, because they were never born at all (i.e., because their mostly-single, mostly-impoverished mothers aborted them). Prior to 1973, impoverished single women... and impoverished married women who knew they could not support another child... did not have that option.

Chapt. 4 of Levitt and Dubner is based on a paper by one of the authors in a scholarly journal, so if you're interested you can look up the original study. (Their book, above, is probably a lot easier to read.) When the paper was published, of course, the author was instantly vilified by the "forces of anti-choice for women" — but in reality, he is not Satan incarnate. Rather, he's a mild-mannered economist.... ya' know, a guy who works with data.

—Custer

*BTW, I see someone rated my thread "5 star." Thanks, whoever you are.