|Sat 11 Feb MMXII-Clk2Enlrg|
I read this article, which included a small photo published below the fold - still some of the most valuable publishing real estate on earth - with a combination of curiosity and suspicion. Whenever something appears odd in the pages of Amerika's newspaper of record, it is usually because the hateful weanie elites of 42nd Street are up to something sneaky, going covert in the furthering of their sinister agenda to undermine Western Civilization.
Probably like everybody else, consumed with curiosity I had to go to YouTube to look at the most viewed vid ever. My intrigue was piqued further when I realized that there is absolutely nothing special about this vid, which leads to the inevitable question: "How is this possible? Even 'shrimp on a treadmill' was better than this."
In effect, the New York Times uses the story of Charlie and his brother's bitten finger to sneer obliquely at white heterosexual family life in Britain. Though the video itself (a four year-old at home with his baby brother, filmed by the father) is the product of a family setting, and talks at length about the amateur videographer father, there is no mention of any mother, leading the reader to speculate that this is perhaps an enlightened "non-conventional" modern British family. Maybe the boys even have two dads?
But then the Times quotes their fellow anti-majority peers over at a British rag, who talk about Charlie and his family:
Now of course, if the boys did have two fathers, then of course the family would be the object of the Times' most fawning accolades. But apparently that is not the case.
The New York Times: Sticking A Knife In The Heart Of All That Is Good And Decent Since 1977.