“Say, Betcha Didn’t Know . . . .”
the Story Behind a NY Times “Retraction”
After her excellent comparison of the courage exhibited by Arizona Governor Jan Brewer compared to our wimpy President’s non-efforts to protect the nation’s borders, perhaps Sarah Palin ought to be making statements about the New York Times publishers, editors, reporters, columnists, op-ed writers, bloggers (and everybody but the janitors) all combined . . . lacking the “cajones” of a one-celled protozoan . . . Let’s talk about one “retraction” in the Times . . . .
Some months ago, the liberal media was alive with a story about TEA Party members yelling the N-word fifteen times (or twenty-nine times in one paper) at Black members of congress as they walked up the capitol steps on that sunny day in March when Obamacare was passed. This was considered BIG . . . front-page news cussed and discussed in every liberal broadcast for weeks to come. Only one problem, it never happened. The $100,000 reward offered to anyone who can show “verifiable video footage,” showing one instance (not fifteen or twenty-nine) of the n-word being used has been offered lo, these several months and no one has offered documentary evidence, much less collected the reward. Similarly, no video footage of any Black congressman or any congress member being spat upon on that day has ever emerged.
Just the other day, (and this is August 5th) almost five months after it purportedly happened, the New York Times finally (having researched the story carefully – hah!) ran a retraction/correction . . . well, sort of . . . .
What they did actually was not even deign to draw attention to the retraction/correction by putting it off as a separate item at all. Instead they boldly went where few retractions/corrections have gone: they placed it inconspicuously at the bottom of another story. To wit:
“The Political Times column last Sunday, about a generational divide over racial attitudes, erroneously linked one example of a racially charged statement to the Tea Party movement. While Tea Party supporters have been connected to a number of such statements, there is no evidence that epithets reportedly directed in March at Representative John Lewis, Democrat of Georgia, outside the Capitol, came from Tea Party members.”
“All the News that’s Fit to Print?” Really???? Perhaps the Times ought to change their motto to “All the Gutless Lies Obama Would Prefer We Print.” First of all, that, whatever else it is, is neither a correction nor a retraction. There is NO “we got it wrong and we apologize” aspect to that piece of garbage by the piece of garbage Times.
1. Notice that the actual event is left muddy, there’s no mention of the n-word or Mr. Lewis’ race . . . nothing that could make the “apology” meaningful.
2. Notice that the retraction/correction was certainly NOT page-one news like the original story was . . . .
3. Notice the retraction/correction refers to “one example” . . . when the Times -- by March, 2010 – had already been printing such accusations about the TEA Party and conservatives virtually non-stop without basis for over a year . . . and meanwhile has continued to spout out this nonsense ceaselessly since March, 2010.
4. The retraction/correction is over four months late and it’s not actually either a retraction or a correction and it does not apologize . . . it just says, “There is no evidence . . . epithets . . . came from TEA Party members” which is, at best a half-truth since . . .
5. The retraction/correction does NOT say “There is NO EVIDENCE any epithets with n-words were hurled by anyone at all.
6. The retraction/correction says “While Tea Party supporters have been connected to a number of such statements,” but doesn’t say for every two thousand such accusations (not connections, but “accusations”) perhaps one** is true.
7. The retraction/correction talks about “a generational divide over racial attitudes” . . . that, my friends, is what has been known as a “weasel phrase” or possibly “a (or an) euphemism” . . . but which is actually just an old-fashioned LIE, not a half-truth, a LIE. It’s acting like . . . a) some sort of generation-gap exists and b) the TEA party (with older members?) treats differences in race one way that’s presumably at least a bit racist and c) the Times and its readers knows better because they are elite, intelligent, etc. but . . . RACISM, you Times morons, is RACISM, and lies are lies, and p_ss-poor journalism is pi__-poor journalism.
8. The Times seems to have never gone to the “horse’s mouth” for final verification of the event’s truth or falsity. Since Representative Lewis, a Black Democrat, is reportedly one of the few congressmen of either party, any race, any gender, any age who has been repeatedly and fairly called “honorable.” Yet Mr. Lewis has repeatedly refused to corroborate the stories about being spat upon or having the N-word hurled at him. Perhaps the Times should have asked Mr. Lewis, if his silence itself on this matter was “honorable” (since the only probable reason for this silence was to NOT gainsay his fellow Democrats)?
9. The Times has continuously run as straight-news, each and every liberal’s or left-wing Democrat’s accusation of RACISM as undeniable fact for at least the last ten years IF DIRECTED at CONSERVATIVES . . . but which has never attributed the barely 4% of Black votes going to Mc Cain while Obama received more and a larger percentage of White votes (almost 48%) than Kerry or Gore as having any racial significance at all. Isn’t it strange that the Times, which regards itself as so urbane and sophisticated in oh, so many ways, is so gullible that after ten years it has never figured out that the unending refuge for progressive (wanting to “progress” beyond the outdated and faulty Constitution) scoundrels is labelling all their opposition as “RACISTS.” How sophisticated is that? Just so the Times understands Rajjpuut clearly, he is saying the Times is guilty of not only abetting reverse-racism, but also of continuously and consistently falsely charging and abetting false charges of racism by others against Conservatives and conservative groups.
10. a) The Times recently OMITTED publishing news about a speech being applauded by the NAACP wherein a Black preacher and a couple of thugs who helped him beat up a Black entrepreneur (the man made a fortune in 2008 selling Obama buttons, but tried to sell “The audacity of dope” buttons featuring the president with a joint between his lips) were defended and lauded. The speaker repeatedly praised the preacher and the other thugs and called the entrepreneur repeatedly “an Uncle Tom.” b) the Times has also NOT investigated the story about the Black Panther voter intimidation suit being dropped nor c) the story about Obama appointee Deputy Attorney General Julie Fernandez ordering a roomful of Department of Justice employees to “forget about investigating voter intimidation and racism cases where the victims are White and the perpetrators are Black and d) nor have they run the story about Ms. Fernandez ordering DOJ employees to forget about “investigating violations of the Motor Voter Act” that is, e) like Ms. Fernandez, the New York Times is acting like racism is just something that Whites do to minorities, it can never happen the other way around.
The Times which, (in keeping with the “all-non-progressive’s are racists theme”) has ceaselessly slandered FOX News . . . but, in fact, the Times isn’t worthy of one-ten-thousandth the esteem which FOX’s real journalists earn every minute of every day. Cowardly, cowardly, cowardly, cowardly, cowardly New York Times. Until such time as the same New York Times effort that’s gone into propagating these lies is shown for dispelling them and pointing out those who so blithely and continuously speak them, until that day . . . cowardly, cowardly New York Times.
Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,
Rajjpuut
**Rajjpuut who has attended three TEA Party events and never seen one instance of hate or racism does know of two instances worth mentioning since March, 2009 (a year before the Obamacare passage) . . . .
#1 In a specious incident, a fellow was shown on FOX News carrying a sign partially clouded over by their editorial staff that presumably said something like, "F_ck the N_ggers." In that 20 second-incident he was quickly confronted by about five male TEA Party members, an argument ensued, his sign was torn from his hands trampled upon, and he was physically escorted from their midst. FOX also showed coverage of three other networks' newcasts which just showed the man holding his sign with the word “nigg_rs” clearly visible in a still photograph.
#2 Within a supposed TEA Party splinter faction, (Rajjpuut has seen evidence that makes him believe it was used by Harry Reid in Nevada to choose his least capable opponent, Sharon Angle, to win the Republican nomination -- but who knows it could be a valid organization pursuing TEA Party goals) known as the TEA Party Express , there was an upper echelon official who is supposedly "a shock jock" who on his personal blogsite spouted hate attacks on Barack Obama and referred to Islam as having "a monkey god." After, what Rajjpuut believes was an inordinate length of time the shock-jock was forced to resign. In any case the TEA Party express has zero credibility with any of the TEA Party membership outside themselves.
