7/27/13, "Interview With President Obama," NY Times interview transcript, Following is a transcript of an interview with President Obama conducted by Jackie Calmes and Michael D. Shear of The New York Times. The interview was conducted at Knox College in Galesburg, Ill., on July 24, 2013.
Following are two paragraphs from the interview, the opening paragraph by the NY Times, and the second to last paragraph in which Obama says US racial tensions "may get worse":
"NYT: So we’re here with you, already four years since the recession officially ended. And as your speech sort of laid out, you still have a situation where growth remains slow, income’s is unequal, and a lot of American -- unemployment high -- and a lot of Americans start to worry that this is the new normal. Your intentions aside like you stated them out there in the speech, why shouldn’t we expect that you’re going to leave behind an economy that’s fragile, continued income inequality, and a weakened middle class?...
"Mr. Obama: And racial tensions won’t get better; they may get worse, because people will feel as if they’ve got to compete with some other group to get scraps from a shrinking pot. If the economy is growing, everybody feels invested. Everybody feels as if we're rolling in the same direction. And so a lot of the other issues that we’re talking about -- whether it’s climate change or immigration, or how we manage our trade relations -- all those are eased if we’ve got our economic act together."...via Free Republic
=========================
Comment: I read the interview a few times and didn't see that the NY Times had brought up "racial tensions," but maybe I missed it. After Obama's hateful and dangerous remarks, there was no follow up by the NY Times, thereby allowing hatred, violence, and even death to hang in the air over every American including those who cried tears of joy that millionaire Obama was elected. He spoke for one more paragraph after which the NY Times said, "Thank-you Mr. President." If you're the NY Times, you're thrilled. The NY Times lives to incite racial hatred and violence:
Following are 3 examples, reporting on Crown Heights riots in 1991, and two examples from 2012:
A NY Times reporter from the scene in Crown Heights tells how it viciously misreported the 1991 Crown Heights riots:
"I was outraged but I held my tongue. I was a loyal Times employee and deferred to my editors."...
8/9/11, "Telling it like it wasn't," Jewish Week, Ari Goldman
"Yet, when I picked up the paper, the article I read was not the story I had reported. I saw headlines that described the riots in terms solely of race. “Two Deaths Ignite Racial Clash in Tense Brooklyn Neighborhood,” the Times headline said. And, worse, I read an opening paragraph, what journalists call a “lead,” that was simply untrue:
“Hasidim and blacks clashed in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn through the day and into the night yesterday.”
In all my reporting during the riots I never saw — or heard of — any violence by Jews against blacks. But the Times was dedicated to this version of events: blacks and Jews clashing amid racial tensions. To show Jewish culpability in the riots, the paper even ran a picture — laughable even at the time — of a chasidic man brandishing an open umbrella before a police officer in riot gear. The caption read: “A police officer scuffling with a Hasidic man yesterday on President Street.”
I was outraged but I held my tongue. I was a loyal Times employee and deferred to my editors."...I figured that other reporters on the streets were witnessing parts of the story I was not seeing."...
================================
In 2012, the NY Times viciously edited George Zimmerman recorded words to make him sound racist:
4/3/12, "NYT Zimmerman Edit Even Worse in Print Edition," Breitbart, Big Journalism, Joel B. Pollak
"After Breitbart.com pointed out yesterday that the New York Times had joined NBC and MSNBC in selectively editing George Zimmerman's 911 call to make him look like a racist, a reader emailed us to note that the misleading edit was even worse in some print editions of the newspaper.
Here is the 911 call transcript:
ZIMMERMAN:
This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something.
It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about.
911 DISPATCHER: Okay. And this guy, is he white, black, or Hispanic?
ZIMMERMAN: He looks black.
Now--here is what the Times reported in some print editions (emphasis added below, scanned image above):"“Hey, we’ve had some break-ins in my neighborhood,” Mr. Zimmerman said to start the conversation with the dispatcher. “And there’s a real suspicious guy.”This guy seemed to be up to no good; like he was on drugs or something; in a gray hoodie. Asked to describe him further, he said, “He looks black.”"
- "“Hey, we’ve had some break-ins in my neighborhood,” Mr. Zimmerman said to start the conversation with the dispatcher. And there's a real suspicious guy.
- This guy seemed to be up to no good; like he was on drugs or something; in a gray hoodie; looked black. "Now he's just staring at me," he [Zimmerman] said."
The Times has not yet issued a correction or apology."
-----------------------------------------------
4/2/12, "New York Times Repeats NBC Smear With Selective Edit of Zimmerman 911 Call," Breitbart, Big Journalism, Joel B. Pollak
"Today's front-page article in the New York Times on the Trayvon Martin case repeated NBC's attempt to cast George Zimmerman as a racist by selectively editing his 911 call."
========================
4/3/11, NBC admits editing error on Zimmerman tape
======================
Two 2012 citations about the Times desperately seeking racists:
More, 5/6/12, "NY Times Goes Hunting for Racist 'Ultraconservatives' in Ohio Who Won't Support Obama," NewsBusters, Tim Graham
--------------------------------
5/4/12, "The NYT accuses American voters of opposing Obama because he's black." Ann Althouse [an Obama voter]
"This is a scurrilous article! Where's the evidence? It's just creepy, New York aversion to the fly-over people.
While Mr. Obama will always be known to the history books as the country’s first black president, his mixed-race heritage has only rarely surfaced in visible and explicit ways amid the tumult of a deep recession, two wars and shifting political currents.Exactly. It's remarkable, the absence of racism. But the NYT is just so eager to rake some up anyway.
- The Obama campaign aggressively monitors any racial remarks made against the president, but officials rarely openly discuss Mr. Obama’s race....
"Researchers have long struggled to quantify racial bias in electoral politics, in part because of the reliance on surveys, a forum in which respondents rarely admit to prejudice. In 50 interviews in this county over three days last week, 5 people raised race directly as a reason they would not vote for Mr. Obama. In those conversations, voters were not asked specifically about race, but about their views on the candidates generally. Those who raised the issue did so of their own accord."
I'd like to see the text of these interviews. They give us some quotes that are not fairly characterized as someone saying she wouldn't vote for Obama because of his race, but statements of belief that other people voted out of enthusiasm for having a black President
“I’ll just come right out and say it: he was elected because of his race,” said Sara Reese, a bank employee who said she voted for Ralph Nader in 2008, even though she usually votes Democrat....
“He was like, ‘Here I am, I’m black and I’m proud,’ ” said Lesia Felsoci, a bank employee drinking a beer in an Applebee’s. “To me, he didn’t have a platform. Black people voted him in, that’s why he won. It was black ignorance.”Drinking a beer in an Applebee’s... oh, the horror!===============================
But the main quarrels Democratic voters here have with Mr. Obama have nothing to do with race....Exactly. How disappointing for the enlightened elite in New York City!"
Early Obama supporter and kindred spirit George Soros also hopes for violence in the streets:
1/23/12, "George Soros on the Coming U.S. Class War," Newsweek, Daily Beast, J. Arlidge
"As anger rises, riots on the streets of American cities are inevitable. “Yes, yes, yes,” he says, almost gleefully. The response to the unrest could be more damaging than the violence itself. “It will be an excuse for cracking down and using strong-arm tactics to maintain law and order, which, carried to an extreme,
could bring about a repressive political system, a society
where individual liberty is much more constrained, which would
be a break with the tradition of the United States.”"...
===============================
Comment: Without the NY Times, the world would have a chance.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment