In Loving Lex Luger, the NYT Magazine Redefines Hypocrisy

Nov6MMXI - CLK 2 ENLRG

As we've seen countless times in pervious posts, the disingenuous white liberals (DWLs) at the New York Times feel it is their mission to always depict black people in a positive light, no matter how insanely unrealistic this might be. (The NYT doesn't even consider the option of showing them negatively).

In a breathless squealing love-fest of erectus-worship that appeared in Sunday's Magazine, we have contributing Times communist Alex Pappademas screaming the praises of some new (c)rapper named Lex Luger, the whole while sneering at the white people who are too unenlightened to comprehend the transcendental nature of (c)rap music.

The article, "Lex Luger Can Write A Hit Rap Song In The Time It Takes To Read This,"  has a title that warns the reader, rather not-so-subtly: "this article might be a little pro-african american."

And sure enough, Pappademas jumps into it feet first, and naked.

Now, a feature-length magazine article about an "artist" whose music is set to lyrics such as:

I dont' go to college but the dorm room is my domainFull of pretty bitches show me how they use there brainThey suckin for homework gettin that dome workedJust to say they got with Juicy J and they did it firstOn a bean drinkin dirty spriteBout to fuck that bitch raw bout to roll the diceSex drugs rap music is that college lifeGettin smoked out stoner's night

...might have its place in High Times or Jet, but in Amerika's newspaper of record?  Isn't the Times putting Cain's accuser on the front page every day? Doesn't the Times care about women's feelings?

Instead, this is what the Times has to say about the family planning values of ghetto misogyny:

Somebody needs to tell the New York Times that they can't have it both ways. Oh wait, that's what this site is all about!

As if the act of inserting his tongue into the Luger's rectum and pedestalizing him like he was spawn of MLK material wasn't embarrassing enough, this silly wigger Pappademas has to throw in a little majority-hatred for good measure. 

From the article : 

I don't know about you, but when I'm on the phone with a client and some gangsta is driving by three blocks away in a loudspeaker on wheels, I find the forced interruption of my conversation irritating, not the height of cultural achievement. But I guess I'm not subtle enough to comprehend the "flourish." 

And... it gets worse: it's as if the gangsta has contagiously rubbed off on Pappademas, who realizes that no respectable journalist can write lovingly about (c)rap music without simultaneously spitting on white people. 

From the article: 

Hmm. As if that would ever happen, without the white guy being being shot up, dragged from the car and head-stomped.

So let's conclude our study. The New York Times says:

...subtle, irreverent, oppressed by systemic racism, enlightened, highly intelligent despite heavy drug usage and little schooling, noble, not savage, supremely creative, edgy, magnificent, cool;

While:

...racist, passé, cheap, uncool, unenlightened, unfunny, probably doesn't get a lot of intercourse, deserves to die. 

That sounds about right, right? 

Right.