Soldiering On In The Crusade To Hero-Worship Deviance

Someone needs to tell the Times that this is not news : 


"Mr. G. — Fred Goldhaber, the first and, for four years, the only teacher at the Harvey Milk School in Manhattan, the first school in the country with a mission to provide a haven for gay and lesbian students, died of liver cancer on Monday at his home in Jersey City. He was 63."


(Read his obituary in today's Times). 


Don't get me wrong COTTers, I have nothing against gay people - some of my best friends are... blah blah blah, the usual platitudes.  But that is actually true. 

NYT - Approved 

Gay people have been around since the Greeks made all those homoerotic sculptures, but back then the LGBT crowd didn't need a creepy diversity-obsessed rag like the New York Times to do their bidding. I suspect that they were a lot less whiney back then. 


What is upsetting to us Times haters here at COTT is the way America's newspaper of record goes to such painful extremes to introduce into the mainstream and de-vilify a lifestyle that is based on unnatural acts that in a civilized society would not be discussed in public, never mind idolized. We really don't care what your preferred object of penetration is here at COTT, but what does kind of piss us off is when insane cultural marxist wordsmiths who are a lot smarter than their target audience use insidious propaganda cloaked Trojan Horse-style in mainstream virtue to produce an entire generation of youngsters who aspire to be the next Harvey Milk. 


In the Times' playbook, being gay is an heroic achievement worthy of non-stop adulation, a glorious expression of revolt against the outdated, immoral strictures of Western Society. Anything the Times can do to bring down the West, all the while propping up the Turd World and other superior life forms, they will do from the high throne of their elevated moral position, from which they gaze down with a sneer upon us inferior, outdated cultural troglodytes. 


That the Times would publish the obituary of a thoroughly insignificant figure in today's pages comes as no surprise to us here at COTT, and it should not surprise our esteemed COTTers either. The fact that the dead person in question was an AIDs-ridden pedophile who worked as a teacher would in a sane world have been grounds for law enforcement to be summoned, but in the twisted universe of the New York Times it was an indicator of his newsworthiness.

Clarence Thomas’s Wife to Leave Tea Party Group

A Big Disappointment to the New York Times 

From today's Timesoline:

"Virginia Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, is stepping down from the conservative organization she founded last year." Read more from NYT online...

Like a confused puppy playing with a porcupine, the  New York Times is  conflicted when it comes to how to report in their illustrious pages on Clarence Thomas: a black American who rose up from a background of family dysfunction and Jim Crow oppression in the Deep South to become a Supreme Court Justice and one of the most important policy makers in the country would normally be the kind of stuff that the psychos at the Times drool over. 

Clarence Thomas : Survivor of  a
High Tech Lynching 

But unfortunately for the wishful-thinking disingenuous white liberal idiots who control the country's newspaper of record, there are in America a handful of extraordinary blacks who think for themselves and don't abide by the strictures of paternalistic editorial boards who publish all the news that's print to fit, and ole' Clarence is one of these extraordinary Americans. 

The unofficial journalistic credo of the Times is: "To comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable," a motto borrowed from some idiot who pissed off Teddy Roosevelt and which later became the official slogan of that most useless of Utopian wannabe magazines that one only flips through while standing in line at Whole Foods, "Mother Jones." 

Lawdy, one would think that the NYT would have grown up by now, but noooooo. They are still behaving like the self-righteous bespectacled morons you had to deal with in high school art class when they didn't get their way. 

The Times is on a crusade to prove themselves morally superior to everyone else, it's the old "competitive altruism" concept we have discussed in posts previous. They have taken the simple idea of "standing up for the underdog" to a whole new level of ridiculous. 

And in the case of ole' Clarence, it is amusing to observe how the New York Times struggles between standing up for minorities like Justice Thomas the African American, and vilifying Justice Thomas the spouse of a Tea Part Conservative. 

Keith Richards: The Grey Lady's Favorite Rebel

He Awakens the Rock Star in Only One in
Five African Americans,
According to the New York Times 

Like a screaming teenage girl at Shea Stadium circa 1964, America's newspaper of record has been oozing adulation for the now-respectable ex-badboy Keith Richards since they first got wind that the more wrinkly half of the Glimmer Twins was putting out his autobiography, entitled "Life."

The amount of coverage that the Times has devoted to Richards in the past month boggles the mind: a simple nytimes.com search reveals that in the past seven days thirteen articles on Richards have been published in the pages of America's newspaper of record, while in the past thirty days, there are more than ten thousand references to him.

A similar search reveals that in the same past month, the Times has published just 18 articles in which Winston Churchill, for example, is mentioned; meanwhile a Times Online search of  Charles de Gaulle - the 40th anniversary of whose death on November 9th, 1970 was just celebrated to huge fanfare in France - brings up only 19 results.

Now, there are many ways to bring down the Times, for they make it soooo easy these days, and we at COTT are not claiming that our research methodology is worthy of the scholarly untouchability of, say,  a Michelle Obama dissertation. But nevertheless, we find it suspect that the Times would devote so many column inches to a pop culture figure who would be more appropriately chronicled in "US Weekly" or "People Magazine".

Of course, there is a reason that the Times writes non-stop about Keith Richards: to regain hipster authority among its shrinking youth readership.

What is at once hilarious and tragic to us at COTT, is that the first lines of today's NYT Book Review of "Life" contains a glaring journalistic faux-pax, wherein the rather lame reviewer, Liz Phair, equates ability to comprehend this Times pop culture hero with cognitive ability :

"You better believe it. This cat put the joie in joie de vivre. As the legendary guitarist for the Rolling Stones, Keith Richards has done more, been more and seen more than you or I will ever dream of, and reading his autobiography, “Life,” should awaken (if you have a pulse and an I.Q. north of 100) a little bit of the rock star in you." 


The Times should have known better than to bring up the delicate subject of IQ, even in their breathless coverage of a pop icon whom they adore, and on the very front page of their Book Review at that ! 


We will expound on this topic shortly. In the meantime, for your reading pleasure, please enjoy a few contributions by the well-indoctrinated readers of the grey lady to her comments section :


"Bravo to Keith Richards, one of the most important musical artists of our day as a Rolling Stone, now taking his own legend up a notch as an author. Beatles come, go, die off, but the Stones persist. Greatness lives on." 

"Why the picture with the cigarette? "

"Richards Amazing! The world's number one dirtball on the cover of your prestigious newspaper, in profile no less. A sad day." 

"Hey Baltoboy - the world's three dirtballs right now are Sarah Palin, David Koch, Rupert Murdoch and Glen Beck. Straighten out your priorities. It's only rock and roll."

The New York Times Does Away With Its Credibility

We at COTT were enthused by two events which transpired recently in Germany : the publication of a book by a center-left politician who defied the tenets of political correction to write truthfully and unabashedly about the catastrophic results on Germany of forty years of unbridled non-western immigration, and the declaration by Angela Merkel - Germany's leader and according to Forbes the most powerful woman in the world - that the multicultural experiment in Germany was a failure and a mistake.

Thilo Sarrazin, Center-Left Politician and Author,
 Reviled by the Times, Loved and Admired by 3 out of 4 Crouts

We expected that the inevitable firestorm of liberal refutation of Sarrazin's views would be swift and relentless, and we were not disappointed by the veracity of our predictions.

Steve Sailer writes eloquently and masterfully on this subject, as usual, and until we can finish this post a little later tonight (have to make a beer run at this tiiiiime), we encourage you to read more about this hugely important story from a true master :

http://vdare.com/sailer/101101_habermas.htm


(a little later Saturday night, after the brewsky run...)... 


Hello again fellow New York Times skeptics. We are back from our beer run: we picked up a few bottles of Stella and a 5th of Captain Morgan, so please be indulgent with your new friends at COTT if our words are a teeny weeny bit slurred. Hey's it's Saturday night, give us a break ! 


To get back to the matter at hand: the grey lady's predictably scathing treatment of Deutchsland's newest hero, Thilo Sarrazin: 


First of all, keep in mind that the same policy of multiculturalism that Sarrazin denounces in strict academic terms in his one million-plus bestseller (an amazing feat for a geeky scholarly book with hundreds of footnotes and tables) and that Angela Merkel refutes from a political standpoint, is the same ideology that enabled the foreign-born 911 hijackers to use Germany as the perfect sanctuary from which to concoct their sinister plan of attack against us infidel westerners. 


Germany of course is a land that has been cursed by her somewhat eccentric leaders of times past, as well as the resplendence of a gene pool that has produced some of the greatest achievers in the history of mankind. But thankfully, the boot-on-the-neck guilt that has kept Germany down since that wanker-in-chief Adolf made all of us look bad, after engaging in some very bad behavior that resulted in many of our ancestors being made dead wayyyyy before their time, has apparently come to pass. The Germans are finally starting to respect themselves once again as the great people that they are, multiculturalism and nazi guilt be damned. 


Some 75% of Germans approve of what Sarrazin says about the incompatibility of Muslim immigrants in their homeland - this is a healthy, natural, positive development.   


However, back in la-la land, some 99.8% of the New York Times editorial staff DISapproves, and very wholeheartedly, of what the Germans now approve of, even though what the Germans have finally found the balls to approve of is something that is true for virtually every western nation on earth today. 


As anyone with a brain and an IQ of 100 or more would expect (see this link for a commentary on that most eugenic-sounding statement later), the sick demented freaks at the New York Times lay into poor Thilo from the very first lines of their "Saturday Profile." 


In today Saturday's 6th page feature entitled "With Words on Muslims, Opening a Door Long Shut," New York Times communist Michael Slackman wastes no time demonizing one of Germany's modern day political heroes. Read the article for yourself, you will see what I am talking about. 


The leftist hate starts fast and furious : 


In the first paragraph, Sarrazin is characterized as an: 


"orderly man, who lives in a quiet, orderly house, in a very quiet tree-lined neighborhood." 


We all know that in the insane world of the NYT, "orderly" is code for "white, western, privileged oppressor." 


In the second paragraph of the Saturday Profile, more crimes of the times subliminal code words. You see, not only does Sarrazin ("Heil!", the Times would so love to scream, if they could) not only does Sarrazin live in a tidy house on an orderly street (White privilege!), he also possesses: 


..."the certainty of an accountant adding up rows of numbers." 


Notice the Timesspeak, the subtle reference to the calculating ways of an accountant, (Nazi! screams the Times, without actually saying it outright); notice the Timesspeak, the reference to "rows of numbers" (Nazi! screams the Times - "He is adding up numbers, in rows, like his kind used to do with the rows and rows of..."). 


You get the point. 


The subtleties of the NYT aren't even subtle anymore. 


A few paragraphs down, describing Sarrazin physically: 


"Mr. Sarrazin, 65, is tall and trim, with a head of thick grayish hair, round tortoiseshell glasses and a right eye that is always squinting." 


The implications are so clear to us at COTT, even after a few Stellas, that they seem almost childlike: the stereotypical image of a monacled Nazi: 

How the Times Sees Sarrazin 

Like a spoiled child, the New York Times hates it when they don't get their way: witness the November 2nd elections in the US, and the rise of ethnic identity awareness throughout Europe and indeed, to a far lesser degree, in the United States. The newspaper of record can't stand it when its agenda is not foisted with effortless condescendence upon the masses, as it was when the Fraudulent One was elected out of nowhere to become the President of the United States. 


Thilo Sarrazin represents all that is good and decent about a healthful Western democracy - an established mainstreamer speaking out about the ills of the ways of his peers - and that is why the New York Times cannot stand him. We at COTT wish Herr Sarrazin Good Health, Good Fortune and Godspeed, and thank him wholeheartedly for the innovations that his ancestors made when it came to figuring out how to put brewskies into portable containers. 










  

Grinning the Evil Grin as Canada Fades to Brown

Today, your NYT-hating friends at COTT are going to seek to explore the insanity that springs like the quills of a porcupine from a front page, above-the-fold article that appears in today's edition and written by Times Communist Jason DeParle, "Defying Trend, Canada Lures More Migrants." This article screams out for rectification, and makes one wonder if Mr. DeParle has stopped taking his medication.

In this stomach-turning propaganda puff piece, America's newspaper of record basks in the glow of culture war victory as our gullible neighbors to the north soak up the joys of diversity. Like a vulture watching a baby eating poison candy, the New York Times can barely contain their glee as  the prairie province of Manitoba goes to extreme and seemingly suicidal lengths to attract new immigrants from the Third World. Oh, how the Times feels the love:
“From the moment we touched down at the airport, it was love all the way,” said Olusegun Daodu, 34, a procurement professional who recently arrived from Nigeria to join relatives and marveled at the medical card that offers free care. “If we have any reason to go to the hospital now, we just walk in.”

Once again, the Times reveals its true population replacement agenda as it giggles like a teenage girl with satisfaction that the Canadians of Manitoba have been successfully duped into believing that not only is there nothing wrong with replacing Canada's founding stock with non-whites, but also it is something that will win you all sorts of prizes, not least of which is the moral superiority over us dumb rednecks who have even an iota of European self-identity, and the adulation the grey lady reserves for those who possess such superiority.

Boatload of Diversity 

Of course, what the Times fails to mention is that the people of Manitoba are being doubly duped, for their more sophisticated city-dwelling fellow countrymen have recently started catching on to what is really going on, with this boatload of 500 Tamil refugees who showed up in August and immediately demanded to be taken care of for the rest of their lives providing a much needed major wake-up call.

But meanwhile, in the provinces, the hooded hicks are suckered by big business and clueless politicians into gulping down the propaganda that elsehere is crammed down peoples' throats, and the New York Times just looooooooves. it. They feel the love.

Their strategy is working, and by the time people wake up to what the verminous NYT and the social engineering elite behind the scenes have been doing all these years, it will be too late.

Historical Revisionism in the Op-Ed Section

This year is the 150th anniversary of the election of Abraham Lincoln, and thus of the Civil War. The New York Times uses this occasion to revisit history with a decidedly twisted perspective.

In their series "Disunion," the Times relates the Civil War "as it unfolds," predictably sparing no ink to demonize you-know-who and further the myth that  the war was all about ending slavery (when anybody with a laptop knows it was really more about states rights).

One such target of the Time's loathing is a widowed slave owner from South Carolina whose diary writings are reprinted in the pages of the grey lady, only to be sneered at as the racist rantings of a wicked elitist too blinded by white privilege to see the evil of her ways.

Slavery was infinitely more nuanced than the NYT will ever admit - for them it is an open and closed case.

We'll be watching closely over the coming days to see if the Disunion series makes any mention of what is hands down one of the most important and authoritative (and just plain fascinating) historical documents ever published on Slavery in America: the Slave Narratives. Produced between 1936 and 1938 in the framework of the Works Projects Administration under FDR, the program employed thousands of white college kids and unemployed writers to interview some 2,300 former slaves.

What is disheartening in these narratives to the newspaper of record and therefore unlikely to be mentioned in Disunion, is that 98% of the former slaves interviewed for the project stated in no uncertain terms that they were better off during slavery. Oh well...

The Lying Photo That Started It All

How many of you reading this brand-new blog have heard of Tuvia Grossman? Just two?

I thought so.

Grossman was the innocent Jew attacked ten years ago by a rabid mob of Palestinians doing what they do best (showing how they feel about Jews) in Jerusalem while riding in a taxi on his way to visit the Temple Mount. A photo of Grossman bleeding profusely with a baton-wielding Israeli policeman in the background was mis-captioned by the New York Times to once again make Israel look bad. Keep in mind that this was in September of 2000, before 911 and at the height of the second intifada, when negotiations for the turnover of Gaza to the Palestinians were in full swing. The Times was on an important mission to sway public opinion in favor of an Israeli withdrawal, and even though suicide bombers were spraying the insides of their intestines and shrapnel onto the pink tiled walls of kebab shops on a regular basis, the New York Times provided favorable coverage to the wrong side two-thirds of the time.

One could reasonably argue that dishonest reporting in disgusting newspapers like the New York Times and other self-serving left-wing rags was a direct catalyst of the Hamas takeover of Gaza, not to mention many other unfortunate events around the Western world.

It is amazing to see with what glib condescendence the newspaper of record regards its journalistic duties to inform with impartiality. The elites in their glass towers can not be bothered with a reality and a public opinion that do not conform to their wishful-thinking vision of utopianism.

In the case of the Grossman photo, the Times was slow to publish a correction and when they did it was a weak apology, and anyway the damage had already been done: Israael was once again cast as the aggressor. Meanwhile, in the Metro offices of the Grey Lady, affirmative action hire and plagiarist Jayson Blair was hardly working and working hard to undermine the paper's believability even further by making stuff up, not because he had an agenda like his employer, but because he simply wasn't up to the task. Since that story involved accusations of preferential treatment that touched on the scary scary subject of race, the Times went to enormous lengths to make things right by "Correcting the Record" and "Preventing a Second Jayson Blair." Of course the simplest way to prevent a recurrence of the Blair scandal would be to ban quota hiring, but the NYT could never have that, because after all, according to the laughably predictable op-ed columnist Bob Herbert: "Listen up: the race issue in this case is as bogus as some of Jayson Blair's reporting." Well, there might be a bit of a conflict of interest to that assertion, as Herbert might be an AA hire himself. (He's definitely an AA, always but always whining about "social justice").

On this belated 10th anniversary of the Tuvia Grossman lie, we at COTT are mournful that America's newspaper of record has only gotten worse since that particularly blatant crime, but we rejoice in being able to expose it to such a large audience, in the same way that the Grossman photo inspired these people to do - perhaps one of the most positive things to emerge from this most scandalous of Crimes of the Times.

More Hand-Wringing Over The Black-White Achievement Gap

There are few things the New York Times obsesses over more than the black-white achievement gap, with the possible exception of Israel (and its constant oppression of the noble, kind-hearted, fuzzy Palestinians).

The New York Times Needs Them To Succeed

Although you can read about the peripherally pertinent Dysfunctional Minority Schools With Metal Detectors, Terrible Black Test Scores, and Heroic Puerto-Rican Harlem Principals With Ponytails at least eight days a week in the pages of the newspaper of record, the nauseatingly predictable Times devotes an unbelievable amount of column-inches to the terrible, pesky black-white achievement gap that bothers them so.

Today, the New York Times dipped to new levels of cluelessness in an article entitled "Proficiency of Black Students is Found to be Far Lower than Expected." Whether the geniuses at the Times are guilty of cluelessness as opposed to willful dishonesty is not even open to debate: their snide perfidy is as cynical as it is criminal.

The director of the hilariously named "Achievement Gap Initiative" (AGI) at Harvard goes to such lengths to circumvent the truth that we here at COTT wonder if he has to stay high on mushrooms and brandy to keep the delusion alive.

“There’s accumulating evidence that there are racial differences in what kids experience before the first day of kindergarten,” said AGI director Ronald Ferguson. “They have to do with a lot of sociological and historical forces. In order to address those, we have to be able to have conversations
that people are unwilling to have.”

"Conversations"? You mean like an honest dialogue about race that Eric Holder says us evil whites are too cowardly to have?

Through this quote shines the Times' otherwise secret marxist agenda, with the not-so-veiled implication yet again that black academic failure is the fault of whites.

Convoluted, contortionistic, blame-shifting delusional wishful thinking is a hallmark Crime of the Times, one that appears in its pages with a regularity as obnoxious as an open-handed-slap.

Glorifying the Lowest of the Low

We're going to try to keep to keep it current here at COTT,  but occasionally a NYT article from the recent past that was just so punishingly stupid that we can't seem to stop thinking about it will require commentary. 


A case in point is this  article dated August 14th, 2010,  entitled "In the Rearview Mirror, Oklahoma and Death Row." Check it out, it is beyond belief. 

The author, Dan Barry, tells the tear-jerking story of a failed humanoid, a one James Fisher Jr., who was recently released from death row in Oklahoma after being convicted not once but twice of a murder he never denied almost 20 years ago. 

James Fisher Jr. is African American, and probably gay, and this is why he can do no wrong in the eyes of the psychos at the New York Times. 

What is truly amazing about this article is that Barry makes absolutely no attempt to clarify whether Fisher actually killed a man with a broken wine bottle or not. To Barry it's not really important whether Fisher did it - in fact, in his twisted delusional wishful-thinking liberal nutt sack of a brain, it would be a morally superior scenario if Fisher had in fact killed a (white) man, and gotten away with it. To show you how far we've come, hallelujah. 

I was so gobsmacked by this article that I had to read it twice. Was the author really speaking in such glowing, adoring terms about a murderer? Couldn't possibly be I thought. But after a second read, it turns out that sure enough, that's what he was doing. 

Barry reserves his wrath for the illiberal: the first (black) public defender who didn't represent Fisher well enough (he would of course have gotten a pass from Barry for being black, but thankfully for the purposes of his love-a-murderer column, Fisher's first public defender didn't embrace homosexuality with the same verve that the NYT requires); and the second public defender who, conveniently for Barry, was a white male, well to do, with the additional evil attribute of having a taste for alcohol. 

To Barry, these two men - the conservative African-American, and the white male lawyer, who were donating their time to try to defend Fisher - are the true villains, not the loathsome,  violent, stupid, filthy dirt bag of a murderer who though born into a shit situation will forever be a leach on society's ass. And an expensive leach, with big teeth. 

It's amazing to me how the New York Times, day in and day out, in some twisted delusional variety of liberal logic (they call it: "Comforting the assailed and assailing the comfortable") continues to portray the weakest, the stupidest, the most savage as the true heros of society.  

I understand the whole moral superiority thing - I engage in it myself when a bum asks me for money (I never refuse) - but you would think that the writers at the NYT would be smart enough to recognize that the whole dirtbag uplift program has gone a bit far, creating entire cities of single mothers on welfare. and the world's largest prison population. 

Leave it to the New York Times to get it completely wrong, once again. 

Crimes of the Times - Exposing the Criminal Liberal Bias of the New York Times

The New York Times - America's "newspaper of record" - really pisses me off.

It gets worse by the day, too.

In this new blog, we will analyze an article or two from the Times each day, and rate it on the patent-pending COTT Liberal Bias Bullshit Scale.

Let's get started.

Today, November 9th 2010, we need to talk about a long article that appeared in yesterday's op-ed section entitled "My Endless New York" by Tony Judt (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/08/opinion/08judt.html?scp=6&sq=op-ed&st=cse).

Check it out, but be forewarned: it has a LBBS rating of 8 (out of 10).

What really got my goat was this :

As for Paris, it has its sequestered quarters where the grandchildren of Algerian guest workers rub shoulders with Senegalese street vendors, while Amsterdam has its Surinamese and Indonesian districts: but these are the backwash of empire, what Europeans now refer to as the “immigrant question.”

As to be expected with the newspaper of record, this article combines the usual sniveling liberal bias with a schaudenfraude-like delight at the decline of Western civilization, while engaging in criminal dishonesty as to the causes of this decline.  

Judt tiptoes around the dangerous, career-killing subject of race, and in the vacuum created by the taboo of calling a spade a spade, leaves the reader even less informed about the way London, Paris and New York have been changed by forty years of post-war liberalism. 

To dismiss with such glib assertion the reverse-colonization of every single one of the great capitols of the white western world is the height of liberal hubris. 

It feels to me like Judt is saying that secretly he is horrified at the changing face of Western civilization, like a scientist whose monster turns out to be so much bigger than he planned. But since his side is winning, the experiment must continue, even if the monster has to kill the lab assistant.  

Of course it would be too much to ask for Judt to inform his readers that this trivial "backwash of empire" phenomenon, which us evil westerners probably deserved anyway, is not limited to the cities he discusses but rather effects every single formerly majority white city on earth, whether that city is located in a country that had colonies (London), or not (Copenhagen). 

Reverse colonization and population replacement are in full swing in the western world, and the New York Times couldn't be happier. In the race to achieve suicidal moral superiority, the New York Times is clearly in the lead.