From the article :
I am starting to become more and more and more convinced that the New York Times' subversive agenda can best be described in terms of a Venn Diagram.
In other words, the policy-dictating little untermenschen at Amerika's newspaper of record know full well that the vast majority of their readership is not wise to the greater agenda behind the Times' reporting.
I asked a female friend point blank last night: "So you are okay with the prospect of living in a majority Hispanic America in a few years' time?"
Of course she said that "Of course" she was. Why shouldn't she be? Aren't the illegal Guatemalans and other Mesoamericans working on her house hard-working people? And as such, aren't they worthy of the kind of praise that a right-winger like the person who would even ask such a question would deny them?
Hers is a classic example of Venn Diagram thinking when it comes to the Big Issues that the New York Times and the rest of the MSM attempt to hijack via their wicked exploitation of popular Western notions of fairness.
"Why would you be against a gay hip hop artist? How unprogressive and bigotted of you," they would say in response to this post.
But like the smaller (not to scale) green circle on the left, they are blissfully unaware of the sinister contents of the two bubbles on the right of the Diagram.
The New York Times conquers and influences by subterfuge, relying upon the mild benevolent cluelessness of their readership. The issues are so much deeper than they appear to be.