Archive for May 3rd, 2006

Publishers and Bead-Buyers

I just wrote a piece of wisdom on how to get published.

When Whitaker Online first started, I wrote an article called “The Bead Buyers.”

“The Bead Buyers” discusssed the sort of wisdom I offered you about publication today. As an old hand with great experience I told you the inside story of how publication works.

In the “Bead Buyers” I told you the inside wisdom that a real expert would give you about making a fortune in dealing with the Bead Buying Tribe.

The expert you hired would explain to you that the Bead Buyers were only interested inthe bead they stuck in their noses. The expert woud explain to you which color of beads they loved in their noses.

Your expert would explain to you, in detail, exactly how to deal practically with these bead buyers.

But the expert never said that the bead-buyers were bright.

Am expert on Latin American business will tell you they don’t DO things unless you approach them just right.

They miss EVERYTHING as long as you know Senor Pincillado and know how to take your time.

So when the real world gets to them, it rolls over them like a tak over a chariot.

But the expert has to keep in good with the South American businessman, so he doesn’t SHOW any contempt for them.

The bead-buyers and the New York publishers are hopeless rubes.

Without their monopoly status, they wouldn’t last a week in the real world.


1 Comment

Moderating Comments

It is very discouraging to me when all I see is spam.

The above sentence was designed to make you feel guilty and write more comments.

I am very, very FAST. After decades of editing, I see obscenity instantly. You don’t use it, but I have to look for it.

All I look for is comments that are actually something YOU said.

Something YOU wrote.

Commenters have stopped giving me huge cut-and-pastes from the Bible or someone. You WRITE it.



If you don’t read the comments, you are not reading Bob’s Blog.


1 Comment

Writing for Publication

Some people here have said my precious words should be collected and published.

One ofhte joys of getting old is that you understand that people have their own motives, and you don’t mind.

The second that it finally got through to them that collecting my stuff was not a ticket to their first publication, the thing was forgotten.

So someone, once again, asked me about how to get published.

This is the real world:

I was able to get published because I had, among other things, organized a march of tens of thousands of working people who had bused themselves into Washington, DC at their own expense.

This is NOT the easy way.

I wish I coud tell you all I am thinking, but your question was how to get published.

My answer will irritate the hell out of you, as it did me once.

You go to some obvious place, like your school newspaper. You write what THEY ask you to write about.

Publication is a PRODUCT, like any other product.

I used to read what I wrote, no matter what it was in, over and over. I LOVED seeing myself in print. I don’t think you can be a writer if you don’t.

So you go and get yourself in any kind of print. And you love it or you can forget it.

Publication is people.

NEVER miss a chance to MEET somebody who has input into what gets published.

That’s where I missed the boat.

The world of publication is a very, very tiny world, mostly in New York City.

You really need to move to New York with an introduction.

Remember that you asked me for ADVICE, not a description of the world as I would like it to be.

I repeat, publication is people. You will have to be on the make, and there is nothing wrong with being onthe make, and to meet people who will publish you.

I published a major work with the third largest publisher on earth.

Ticket to ride?

No way.

A publisher must SELL his books. A magazine edfitor must SELL his magazine.

Publication is a PRODUCT. If you want him to publish your IDEAS, you are asking for a free ride.

He is trying to keep his publication ALIVE, and most of them have a very short life span.

Fit in BUSINESSWISE and the editor will consider you a part of the team.

Writing is market research.

Would you like more of this?



Dennis versus New Guy

As we say down South, I glory in New Guy’s spunk.

Most antis I rip up jsut get made or, more often, leave in a huff.

Not New Guy.

And he catches me in the same thing you other commenters catch me at, cofusing one commenter with another.

Since he’s new here, he doesn’t know I do that yet.

No excuses, New Guy, when I do that I’m just plain wrong.

My readers stick with me because they think I have a lot to say.

So here is 1) Dennis’s reply to New Guy, 2) New Guy’s comment and 3) my windup:


What is interesting, is that the questions the anti’s have about what we say, are vague. Having followed the thread, it is intersting to note that anti’s say, and I’m paraphrasing here “I don’t understand”. What they fail to ask for is, is clarification on the parts they don’t understand.

If you are posed a question or a position which you are trying to respond to, and you do not understand part of it. You question the writer on the section that you didn’t understand. This is the standard response when someone genuinely doesn’t understand.

If they don’t understand any of it, then either they are too intellectually challenged to make a coherent argument, or they are trying to avoid the question being posed.

Comment by Dennis —

Spunky New Guy:

Since the mods haven’t let my response to you through yet, let me tell you what I will say.

I never assumed that you didn’t go to college. You might well have been a professor of

economics. You still don’t understand economic rationality. I have disagreed with

professional intellectuals on all sorts of subjects when I know I’m right. I am not afraid

of your credentials.

Also, the fact that you were a professional writer doesn’t mean you know how to write

properly. The world is full of writers who are witty and clever, but do not understand logic

and thus cannot articulate their positions well enough to pass the scrutiny of people who DO

understand logic. If your standard of argumentative writing is that arguments should be

clearly stated with easy to understand trains of reasoning then the writers I refer to are

poor writers, no matter how much money they make at their trade. Since we were having an

argument, argumentative standards are the only proper standards to apply to the quality of

our writing. So the fact that you have made a large amount of money at writing does not tell

me that you are a good argumentative writer. It might just tell me that you are witty and

clever, but don’t understand logic. This seems quite likely.

I did not write the comment about defining antis.



Newguy, you antis constantly complain, probably often correctly about the heavy had of Stormfront moderators. So do the eregular Stormfronters.

But Mommy Professor, like so many priests, lacksa a sense of humor.

It is a bit funny to hear people on a side that absolutely bans all debate on race, that uses riots here and PRISON in Europe, complain about censorship in the area provided for you on Stormfront.

When I SAY this, antis belatedly say they don’t like all that censorship.

But they NEVER use the antis thread to protest that censorship unless we throw it in their faces.

Don’t blame us for assuming you approve of the criminal suppression on your side:

SILENCE IS CONSENT and you are SILENT about it.

I have already apologized for misquoting you.

Regular readers will get a laugh out of your telling me you are not afraid of me. I give them hell for any apology for their opinions. The last thing I do is ask themt o be afraid of my credentials.

The problem is that antis keep ASKING for credentials. Was it you who said I had skimmed through Atlas Shrugged — I have read it several times — and then said I didn’t know what economic rationality was?

“Skimmed through” is a heavy accusation. It implised strongly that since I am not on your side, I don’t read much.

No, you didn’t accuse me of not going to college. You just said I had trouble reading.

Reciting my credentials is very, very boring for me. But every word you said demanded that I do so.

Then you accuse me of bragging or defiantly say you are not afraid of me.

I am doing neither. You accused me of being an ignoramus so I had to go through all that credentials crap to answer you.



Interesting Exchange on Stormfront

In response to my proposal on using “white survivalist” instead of “white nationalist,” a young guy said they would call us racists anyway, so he would call himself a racist. His statement is below. This was my reply:

You will find I sympathize with your point of view.

Nick Griffin was kind enough to quote me in his column as saying that young people like swastikas because anybody who has any decent instincts is always called anaziwhowantstokillsixmillion jews.

I said, “Anybody with any male hormones at all is going to want to say, ‘All right, damn you, I’m a Nazi!”

In my book published exactly thirty years ago, I warned that if liberals kept screaming “Racist!” every time somebody disagreed with him, someday people would turn around and say, “OK, I’m a racist. So what?”

I’ve seen that happen.

But propaganda has to be more than a means of working off your feelings.

I have spent over fifty years being called a Nazi and a racist, and I have long since had the urge to cram a swastika down their throats or up their …

Well, anyway, I’ve had to restrain myself.

Originally Posted by vajo jr
Some people might not like what I’m going to say, but I’m going to say it anyway, because I just don’t give a damn. It really does’nt matter what you want to call yourself, either “White Nationalist or White Survivalist”, your still going to be called a “Racist” in the eyes of the public. So in my own opinion, I’d rather just be called a “White Racist”, and let the chips fall where they may, period!