Showing posts with label NYT's. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NYT's. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 2, 2020

NYT's Journalist Justifies Looting, Property Damage

Tuesday, the author of the ahistorical “1619 Project” Nikole Hannah-Jones, made some disturbing arguments justifying violence to PBS’s Christiane Amanpour. She claimed it was “immoral” to call looting violence.
Destroying property which can be replaced is not violence. And to put those things -- to use the exact same language to describe those two things, I think really is not moral to do that.  We're 13% minority in majority white country. We are descendants of people that were enslaved in this country. So ultimately our protest is only as successful as we can convince white Americans to actually comply with the Constitution and treat black Americans as full citizens. 
I think I would not describe looting as violence, looting is property damage, but it is not violence. We need to have to have some perspective on what exactly we’re seeing when we call that violence and looting. When you talk about someone taking something from a big box main store, it's symbolic. One pair of shoes that you've stolen from the Foot Locker is not going to change your life, but it is a symbolic taking....."
In her Orwellian newspeak saying violent activities weren't actually violent means burning down someone’s house or business is considered a “peaceful” activity to the NYT journalist.

LARWYN'S  LINX@ Doug Ross Journal for the Linkage! ~

Sunday, December 29, 2019

DJT is Inflicting Employment on People of Color

The New York Times laments that in August, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers swept up 680 illegal immigrants during raids on seven food processing plants in Mississippi. Without the cheap illegal immigrant labor, the companies were forced to hire Americans to do the work, and black Mississippians are now taking back jobs that were taken from them by immigrants.

The best part of this is the monumental struggle to find something bad in increased employment for Black Americans. But rest assured, the NYTs and the NAACP are on it and had no problem.

The president of the local NAACP compared the raids to slavery, proving once again the NAACP has become nothing more than an arm of the Democratic Party that stopped advancing the interests of Blacks a long time ago. And in typical liberal gymnastic digression the NYTs tells us :
The raids were believed to be the largest statewide immigration crackdown in recent history and a partial fulfillment of President Trump’s vow to remove millions of undocumented workers from the country. The impact on Mississippi’s immigrant community has been devastating. For nonimmigrant workers, the aftermath has forced them into a personal reckoning with questions of morality and economic self-interest: The raids brought suffering, but they also created job openings.
Amazing, isn't it! Their tortured manipulation of the vernacular carefully avoids the salient data; these people were in the country ILLEGALLY, therefore they were employed ILLEGALLY. This is not some ethical conundrum. This is the law. But "the law is a ass" when it conflicts with the NYT's sheltered liberal elite world view that the most important goal of the modern era is the subsuming of America in a sea of unwashed illegals, so finally...FINALLY...their progressive utopia can be achieved. And if that destroys their old and tired weapon of choice (Black America)? Then so be it.

[Ace HQ]

Sunday, September 1, 2019

Scientist Says She’s Received ‘Yoda-like advice’ from Shrubbery

I'm not old enough to remember the sixties. I am a child of children of the sixties & seventies, and have worked with many who were there and were part of making the sixties the sixties. So I am very aware that there was a time when if someone told you that a tree spoke to them, it was a very good sign the there was some 'Orange Sunshine' or 'Brown Microdot' floating around somewhere. But when you hear statements like that today, it gives you pause. And if weren't for those intrepid intellectual truth seekers of New York Times, you might never have learned about the scientist who was advised by an oak tree to pursue her studies. Which brings us to Dr. Monica Gagliano......
from the NYT:
"Monica Gagliano says that she has received Yoda-like advice from trees and shrubbery. She recalls being rocked like a baby by the spirit of a fern. She has ridden on the back of an invisible bear conjured by an osha root. She once accidentally bent space and time while playing the ocarina, an ancient wind instrument, in a redwood forest. “Oryngham,” she says, means “thank you” in plant language. These interactions have taken place in dreams, visions, songs and telekinetic interactions, sometimes with the help of shamans or ayahuasca. 
Back in 1973, an explosively popular book, “The Secret Life of Plants,” made pseudoscientific claims about plants, including that they enjoy classical music and can read human minds. The book was firmly discredited, but the maelstrom made many institutions and researchers reasonably wary of bold statements about botanical aptitude. 
Regardless, last year Dr. Gagliano published a heady and meandering memoir about the conversations with plants that inspired her peer-reviewed work, titled “Thus Spoke the Plant.” She believes, like many scientists and environmentalists do, that in order to save the planet we have to understand ourselves as part of the natural world. It’s just that she also believes the plants themselves can speak to this point. 
“I want people to realize that the world is full of magic, but not as something only some people can do, or something that is outside of this world,” she said. “No, it’s all here."

When logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead, and the white knight is talking backwards, and the red queen's off with her head, remember what the dormouse said.
Feed your head. - Grace Slick


Thursday, July 4, 2019

NTY's Blow: There Are Tanks In The Nation’s Capital And Concentration Camps At Its Border’

RS -Yes, the New York Times Charles Blow really said it. He tweeted, “Let this sink in: There are tanks in the nation’s capital and concentration camps at its border. The drift to [sic] toward the unimaginable is unmistakable.”

What is it exactly about patriotic displays that causes the left to completely lose all sense? The mere sight of a flag to a liberal has become the equivalent of showing a cross to a Satanist or kryptonite to Superman. And the most ironic thing about it is that liberals are running headlong toward a socialist ideology which actually does have the potential to rob them of their freedom.

It’s dangerous when “opinion leaders” such as Charles Blow and AOC make remarks like this. Before long, these phrases, outrageous as they are, will be picked up by other political commentators and politicians and will soon become part of normal conversation, just as terms like “manufactured crisis” have. The left has become increasingly anti-American and they no longer even try to hide it.

But it didn't take long for Patriotic Americans to burn his ass all over the tweeter:
“This is a lunatic take. This manages to insult Holocaust survivors and the US military all in one internet post.” 
“You should leave while you still can Charles.”“I guess you missed JFK’s inauguration.” “Let this sink in.” “The tanks are stationary & unarmed for a July 4th parade.” 
“Our “concentration camps” detain ILLEGAL migrants,& ALLOW THEM TO LEAVE OR APPLY FOR ASYLUM without the murder, slavery,one normally associates with them.@nytimes employs liars/demagogues.” 
“Someday there will be a new Republican president, who you will also breathlessly try to convince us all is Literally Hitler. Pace yourself.” 
“2020 is going to hurt you all so so bad.” 
“Your constant “EVERYTHING IS LITERALLY HITLER” is going to get him re-elected because people are tired of being constantly told they’re evil incarnate just for not being Democrats.” 
“Did you complain this hysterically when Eisenhower, Nixon, Clinton, Reagan, and Bush did it? It’s not the end of the world. Climb back in off the ledge.”
The left has lost all connection to reality, as they sit in the freest, wealthiest nation in the history of the world.

* Charles Blow is a senior opinion page columnist at the NYT, is a regular guest panelist on CNN, and in his free time enjoys engaging in man-butt sex. 

(Red State)
~ Thank You Daily Gator for the Linkage! ~

Monday, September 10, 2018

Ye Shall Know Him by His Fruits

Over the weekend, among the incessant yelling of racism, speculation of who is the mysterious "Q"etc. the question still burned as of who wrote the scathing Op-ed in the NYT last week.  I've believed all along it was just a in-house NYT hit piece. Until they prove it's not, I will not believe otherwise.  Some others much smarter than I believe it is a genuine piece from inside the administration, but with a bit of media misdirection attached......
"The most surprising aspect of the furor surrounding the infamous unsigned New York Times Op-Ed, ostensibly written by a member of the Trump administration, is that anyone believes its author is a senior official. Assuming this person isn’t an employee of the Times, and it is by no means unknown for the Gray Lady’s journalists to fabricate quotes and attribute them to anonymous “officials,” the author of this hit piece is at most a mid-level staffer. Indeed, if this character is actually employed in the Trump administration, it is almost certainly at a level of insignificance verging on invisibility. 
First, the editors of the Times are virulently anti-Trump. Their assurances about the prominence of this furtive functionary simply can’t be trusted. Moreover, as Phelim McAleer at Townhall points out, the nation’s “newspaper of record” has a long history of exaggerating the seniority of officials it quotes anonymously. 
Not coincidentally, the solipsistic voice and callow perspective that “Anonymous” brings to the Op-Ed tends to undermine the claim that it was written by a high-ranking official in any administration. Most senior members of the Trump administration are over 50 years old and many are well beyond 60. Yet, throughout the entire essay, there is an unmistakable thread of historical illiteracy and presentism that one would normally associate with a Millennial. 
The piece consists primarily of shopworn clichés that can be heard in any bar in any college town in America (or on CNN if you’re stuck in an airport). This self-styled “defender of our democratic institutions” solemnly states that “President Trump’s impulses are generally anti-trade and anti-democratic,” that he “shows a preference for autocrats and dictators,” that “the country is bitterly divided,” and that the “root of the problem is the president’s amorality.” 
None of this is original. Nor is it accurate. But it does contain a revealing cliché that serves as an indicator of the author’s lack of seniority — the tired trope concerning how Trump has bitterly divided the country. It’s only possible to believe this nonsense if you are too young to remember the deep divisions in public opinion over Vietnam, the Nuclear Freeze movement, the Clinton impeachment, and Iraq. It is not merely inaccurate to blame Trump for today’s political divisions. The youthful hubris of our anonymous genius is such that it obscures the reality that Trump’s successes were actually accomplished by the President and his loyal aides: “There are bright spots.… But these successes have come despite — not because of — the president’s leadership style.” In other words, “Anonymous” has saved the nation from Trump’s “misguided impulses.” 
So, what do we know about the unnamed author of the New York Times hit piece? If this person is a member of the Trump administration, the taxpayers are footing the bill for the deliberate obstruction of their will as expressed in the 2016 presidential election. The good news is that the sophomoric opinions expressed in the anonymous Times Op-Ed are probably nothing more the impotent puling of a powerless cubicle critter."
* Excerpts from David Catron @The American Spectator

Thank You Whatfinger News for the Linkage!

Wednesday, August 1, 2018

NYT Graciously Admits the 1st Amendment Applies to Conservatives

"The fact that conservatives benefit from the First Amendment is not something to bemoan. It is part of the constitutional bargain."- NYT
According to a new op-ed, folks on the left are “increasingly” making the claim that Republicans have “weaponized” the First Amendment. It seems the scary words are just too much for some to bear. Spoken or written ideas are simply too potent.

Fortunately, your political betters at The New York Times are bigger than that. They’ve just run an editorial written by David Cole. He’s the national legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union. You may know them as the organization that occasionally cares about a subset of constitutional issues they agree with. Despite the allegedly-serious argument that “the First Amendment’s very neutrality is problematic, because in an unequal society, the amendment will favor the haves over the have-nots,” the ACLU (and the Times) has decided that free speech is important. That the Constitution applies to to all citizens is quiet a concept!
"Critics are increasingly making the claim that under Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., the First Amendment, once an important safeguard for progressive speech, has become a boon to corporations, conservatives and the powerful. But  the First Amendment doesn’t favor speech of the right or the left; it simply takes the government out of the business of controlling speakers by virtue of what they say.
The fact that conservatives benefit from the First Amendment is not something to bemoan. It is part of the constitutional bargain. 
It simply means the First Amendment is operating as it should, neutrally preserving the lifeblood of democracy. …these developments should not lead liberals or progressives to lose faith in the First Amendment. For starters, the amendment’s core requirement is that the government must remain neutral regarding the content and viewpoint of speech. As a result, a decision protecting conservative speech will equally support liberal speech."
The very fact that the New York Times felt this was worth printing suggests that even they recognize the left has drifted closer to the fascist black hole than most of us (who are already deeply jaded) have suspected. Think about it. This means that the left is so enamored with the idea of eliminating free speech that the New York Times – itself a leftist-statist standard bearer – felt it necessary to admonish them.

We’re glad you’ve finally noticed …and we’re deeply concerned that you had to.

Excerpts from Robert Laurie

Thank You WHATFINGER NEWS for the 'Blog Explore' Linkage!

Saturday, March 10, 2018

I'm Beginning to Believe Every Damn One of Them are Nuts!

It’s really never been a secret to anyone with an IQ above room temperature that the American print media have long had a bias they really haven't tried to hide. And here is a creepy little story that shows just how deep the leftist rot is in some of the most influential media circles. 

The first female editor of the New York Times and author of “Obama: The Historic Journey,” published in 2009, Jill Abramson, was the paper’s executive editor from 2011-2014 until she was unceremoniously booted out of the NYT's Ivory Tower, and as was the 'woke' thing of those days, replaced with a black male. Being a good little leftist soldier that she is, she quietly excepted her station in those gotta be politically correct times.
Ah Jill, Sweetie That's Not a Doll

In a new piece she wrote for The Guardian Abramson has fessed up that she has been so distraught by Donald Trump's ascension to the Presidency and all that has come with it, that she is carrying around a Barack Obama “therapy doll” in her purse:
"It’s easy to look at what’s happening in Washington DC and despair. That’s why I carry a little plastic Obama doll in my purse. 
I pull him out every now and then to remind myself that the United States had a progressive, African American president until very recently. Some people find this strange, but you have to take comfort where you can find it in Donald Trump’s America."
Yes Jill, people do find this strange! Especially when it comes from someone who claims to be the self-appointed guardians of the truth. It's pretty obvious that Abrahamson OD'd on hopium and changium during the Barky years. People like this need to spend some serious cash and extensive time in therapy because a lost election should not bring on this sort of mental trauma with sane people. Bless Her Heart!  

Thank You Gerard VanderLeun @ American Digest for the Linkage!