One of the great but perverse pleasures of my life when I’m in New York City is to read the New York Times. It’s perverse because no paper north of Saudi Arabia lies quite as blatantly as the Times does, its lying based on omission rather than invention, and by the use of the kind of selectivity on news reporting that would earn a Soviet-era Pravda newshound the Stalin prize. Excluding facts, indeed entire stories, which do not fall within the purview of its viewpoint is the paper’s norm, rather than the exception. “All the news our bias allows” should be its masthead motto, but even there, the Times is spinning the facts: “All the news that’s fit to print” is the first big lie one encounters on page one.
If a Martian were to read the Times for the first time he, she, or it would most likely think that America is a country with a tiny white population of tyrannical and cruel slaveholders, and the rest are a large majority of blacks and Hispanics who serve their white masters under horrendous conditions. As I write this, a horrible carjacking has taken place in New Jersey: A white lawyer was murdered as his wife looked on when he refused to give the keys to his car to two black thugs. The thugs took the car for a joyride and dumped it nearby. After a large bounty was offered, four black hoodlums were arrested. The Times never once mentioned that the perpetrators were black, nor that they had long rap sheets of criminal activities. In another case, a bit earlier, the fact that a perpetrator of a foul crime against a defenseless family was a Guinean with a very long criminal record was again shielded by the Times because he was black. It was left to the tabloid New York Post to ring the bell and tell us peasants that the Guinean was a career criminal.
My favorite, however, is the book-length series the Times bored us with the week before Christmas, featured prominently every day on Page One, that tries hard to tug at our heartstrings with the case of a homeless 12-year-old black girl by the name of Dasani. Here, according to the Post, is “what the Times left out,” while it hinted very strongly that rich America has turned her back on poor children like Dasani. First and foremost the girl’s parents spend $14,000 per annum given to them by a grateful nation as a cash-benefit income, with most if not all of it going for drugs. Not the kind you and I buy at the pharmacy, but the type sold by dealers on street corners, mainly crack cocaine. A $49,000 inheritance in 2008 has also come and gone. Another 15,000 smackers are given to the parents in food benefits, and some more cash comes in from private charities. Dasani’s parents have another seven children, and they all live together in order to raise the benefits. So, the reason the mother and stepfather (of course he’s a stepfather; the biological dad is as much a mystery as the Unknown Soldier) are homeless is because they were paid by the city and the state and the federal government for housing but spent it getting high. In the homeless shelter where Dasani now lives, her mother has repeatedly been arrested for taking drugs. The city spends $981 million on the homeless every year, but the facts did not fit the sob story the Times was spinning. The letters from outraged bleeding hearts that followed were vomitif, to use a French expression. In the meantime Dasani takes ballet lessons, goes to school, is a bright young child who has now found fame and—soon, I am sure—fortune, while the rest of us foot the bill so the other nine of her family can have fun.
When it comes to homosexuality, the Times leads the field, and not from behind, either—pun intended. In a fire and brimstone editorial, it castigates Vladimir Putin for passing a law that prohibits queer lessons for children, and encourages athletes to cover themselves in pink ribbons to show their opposition to discriminatory laws. In another editorial—the Times likes to mix them—it strongly hints that the TV program Saturday Night Live should hire more blacks. Finally, the case with the ducks and Duck Dynasty had the Times huffing and puffing. A Christian had the gall to say he preferred women to men, and quote from the Scriptures? Worse, as a devout Christian, he called homos sinners. GLAAD and the Times have a pact of steel, no pun intended this time, and in reverse to the Führer and the Duce the two are stifling free speech to one and all. A constitutionally protected right is no longer valid where GLAAD and the Times are concerned. And an American public zonked out by television and violence on the screen is sleepily but happily going along. I think it’s about time someone wakes up and does something about it. In the land of the free, speech has been squelched by a bunch of bum bandits and those effete, penis-envying pen pushers who work at the Times. Time to stand up and holler.