Exposing the Criminal Liberal Bias of America's Newspaper of Record

Exposing the Criminal Liberal Bias of America's
Newspaper of Record

Tuesday, February 28, 2012

Race-Obsessed And Fanatical About Sniffing Out Oppression Wherever It Does Not Exist, The Mad-Dog Diversity Enforcers Of 42nd Street Spit On The Oscars With A Vehemence Extreme Even For Them

Tue28Feb MMXII - Clk 2 Enlrg
This year it seems that the New York Times' coverage of the Oscars is more population-substitution in nature than it has ever been. In article after article on Hollywood's Big Day, the psychotic little weasels at Amerika's newspaper of record groan on and on about how "traditional" and "lacking in diversity" this year's event was.

Somebody needs to send a memo to the psychopaths at the Times (pinned to the tail of an RPG?) that the anti-Western ethos of Hollywood moviemaking is alive and well, thank you very much. But it's not like the communists at the New York Times don't already know this: it's just that the historical revisionism and reality-reversing that are staples of the American movie industry are not as extreme as the Times would like them to be.

Meanwhile as the Times sneers at the lack of progressiveness among their propaganda peers out West, they publish fairy-tale stories about the "burgeoning film industry in Nigeria," where would-be Scorseses are just a big budget away from turning out the world's next "Citizen Kane."

Seriously when it comes to the NYT's reporting on Africa, more and more I get the feeling that I am reading some kind of children's coloring book, where make-believe and willful omission of the most glaring and obvious facts about the Dark Continent are the order of the day. Reading the New York Times is becoming increasingly akin to watching a cartoon; one could almost argue that a few episodes of Bugs Bunny have more redeeming journalistic value when it comes to accurately assessing the social and political reality of modern Africans than a single front page feature with a Kinshasa byline.

But I digress.

"Billy Crystal's Schtick, And The Academy, Need Refreshing"

From the article :

And more anti-majority self-hatred...

The New York Time: Comforting The Afflicted And Genociding The Comfortable Majority Since 1973.


Artur said...

Slate did an excellent article on the Old White (jewish) men of the Academy members.

From that article :

What the Los Angeles Times has given us is a quantifiable, demographic answer to those questions. The Academy Awards emanate from a closed universe of movie industry insiders, who are overwhelmingly rich white guys over age 50 (in the real world, one of the demographic groups least likely to go see movies in the theater). Inescapably, the awards reflect the tastes, inclinations and worldview of that audience, which goes a long way toward explaining all the portrayals of depressed middle-aged men among this year’s nominees (and the otherwise inexplicable best-picture nomination of “Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close”)."

Source : http://www.salon.com/2012/02/21/the_oscars_old_white_male_problem/singleton/

Ps: Check out the comments section: most revealing !

Nicholas Stix said...

“in the real world, one of the demographic groups least likely to go see movies in the theater”


True, but all whites increasingly avoid movie theaters. Just the other day, a non-white immigrant friend pointed out to me that blacks have made movie theaters off-limits over much of the country. I figured that my friend was referring to all of the vicious, racist assaults of white patrons. But no, it’s more basic even than that, covering stuff like shoving whites in line, while waiting for tickets or snacks, and of course, shouting their heads off during the picture.

At some point, theater operators stopped enforcing basic manners, where blacks are concerned. And influential blacks like writer Esther Iverem responded to their own “brothers’” and “sisters’” uncivilized behavior by going to movie theaters in white areas—and venting their spleens against whites!