Expecting the Spanish Inquisition

Me, now, I always expect the Spanish Inquisition, or, rather, its modern equivalent — posturing, preening, self-congratulatory, false indignation on the part of liberals.  And their ideological sisters, the neocons, who are simply liberals who enjoy bombing Arabs. Or having somebody else do it.

What happened is, a couple of days ago, John Derbyshire published a piece at Takimag telling Whites what advice and information they should be giving to their kids on the subject of race relations in America today and how to survive them. (By the way, I just tested that link, and it says at the moment that "This Website isn't available," and I'm wondering if the hissy-fits by liberals all over the net is swamping the site.  If you can't get to it, try again later or go to THIS LINK.)  Anyhow, I commented on his piece, and compared it to a post on the same subject from the idiot liberal point of view elsewhere HERE.  The firestorm of shrill opposition to his almost boringly rational piece began at once, maybe most prominently in the form of a ditzy piece by Elspeth Reeve at the Atlantic Monthly. It's worth reading as a textbook example of mindless liberal fustian, and the comments are fun, too.  Steve Sailer calls our attention to a comparably dull-witted contribution from Josh Barro (who is apparently associated with National Review, as Derbyshire is) in Forbes, which is also followed by interesting comments.  Some of the commenters have the notion that the Derbyshire essay must be satire, which is itself a comment.  Only somebody who lives in a total fantasy world could think that a rational summary of facts and conclusions formed from them could be satyrical.  I suppose, though, that a committed Marxist could think that Adam Smith is satyrical.
Now, the point made by these literary goons is that what Derbyshire says is just so awful that he should be fired from National Review, and while the other National Review people don't go quite that far, they're united in their hysterical rush to dissociate themselves from Derbyshire in all other ways. Voxday cites comments by Joshua Goldberg and Ramesh Ponneru HERE to that effect.  So you can jettison any respect you might have had for those two faux conservatives.
And the righteous indignation has gone international.  Andy Nowicki has found an outrageous article in the Guardian, which says stupid things about Derbyshire and thoughtfully tells us about other stupid things that others have said.  And here's some more liberal drivel from the New York Daily News. Note the last sentence in the article.  The writer thinks he's being comically ironic.  Elsewhere, Nicholas Stix delves deeper into the meaning of this, and says not only that Derbyshire is right, but that the full truth is considerably worse than what he says.

To summarize:  Derbyshire's essay is completely correct and flawless, as such things go, and all his critics referred to above are craven, lickspittle phonies. Do I make myself clear?