Posted on 07/03/2006 5:40:38 PM PDT by Action Alliance
Why Is the New York Times So Wicked?
by Rabbi Aryeh Spero
It is not “the people’s right to know” that pushes the New York Times to publicize classified national security secrets, rather its hope of creating conditions that will cause the defeat of our military and embarrassment worldwide of a defeated America. The public’s right to know is ignored in its pages when it comes to publicizing our victories in the War on Terror and the heroism of our soldiers. What motivates the New York Times is more “our enemies’ right to know.”
Why does the Times do whatever it can to demoralize our troops, cast them as blood-thirsty, bring about humiliation of President Bush and America, and even offer its pages for op-eds by a known al Qaeda terrorist, romanticizing the jihadist cause? Why is it helping our enemies and imperiling our safety and the safety of our children?
It is because the New York Times is not some inanimate object but the propaganda organ of a particular crowd, real people on Manhattan’s Upper West Side, who wish to run the country and control our domestic and foreign policy even though they have not been elected to do so. Because this crowd sees itself as superior to the rest of us and our institutions, and smugly scorns that which was once termed “the American Way,” they have placed themselves in a battle mode hostile and counter to all we hold dear. Our defeat is their victory.
If they can bring down the military, they can force the United States to go the negotiation route where they, not the generals, hold sway. If they can demonize the soldier, they assume we will look to them for “working things out” with the outside forces. If America can be defeated, then “the American Way” of strength against our enemies will be discredited, thereby opening the way for them, the cosmopolitans and transnationalists, to determine within their international fraternity the destiny of America. Bottom line: they wish to control America’s destiny.
But how can Americans living in America, one wonders, be so anti-American? Answer: it is not the physical land between the Atlantic and Pacific they detest. It is the American system: the system that gives the individual American political conservative living in Frankfurt, Kentucky, the same one-man-one-vote power as the editor of the New York Times. And, who is that “hick” congressman to have more power than the enlightened editorial board of the New York Times? It is the American ethos that looks to the military, the Judeo-Christian religious ethic, and the historic American way that riles the publisher and cohorts of the New York Times who feel entitled to America’s homage and political servitude.
They crave a new system that will severely diminish the power of the American citizen -- the rugged individual -- and place it in their hands, in their crowd. They support and call for socialist policies not because they want an equality that would slice their earnings or reduce their high-flying lifestyle to that of the average Joe in Milwaukee. They desire a dependency and collectivism, since they believe they'll, as in all democratic-socialist entities, be running the bureaucracies that will control our lives. They will social engineer society, all the while keeping for themselves the wealth, status and power (above the people) they deem rightfully theirs.
What type of person possesses such arrogance? Elitists, like the New York Times crowd who know they are superior. A crowd that does not accept you as an intellectual, social and political equal. They “care” for you only as their ward, with they above and you below -- all in the name of compassion and equality.
This crowd points to America as the source of all trouble in the world, as do the Europeans, because they think like Europeans, not Americans. They admire Paris, not Peoria. They live here, get rich here and gain power here, but respect the “sophistication” of Stockholm more than the “plainness” of Missouri. They want to reshape America into a Europeanism. Michael Wolff of New York Magazine bragged: “I’m not an American. I’m a New Yorker.” In other words, they are cosmopolitans of the world, above the plebians in Witchita.
The liberalism of the New York Times is different, for example, than that of the millions of individual liberals across the country or even that of, say, the Washington Post. The New York Times expresses the views of a specific crowd that congregates in a physical location primarily in Manhattan’s Upper West Side and, now, upper east side. It is a crowd that has never been comfortable with mainstream America and Americanism. Thus its anti-Americanism comes naturally, and easily. The anti-Americanism that horrifies us is part of their decades-old mindset. It comes with that neighborhood.
Unlike the liberalism of ideology seen in other parts of America, the anti-American leftism of the Upper West Side/New York Times crowd is akin to a heritage, passed down from generation to generation within the families living there. Additionally, contra-Americanism is their identity, a raison d’etre of this particular community. With all its wealth, power and privilege, it still feels alien to historic America and hopes and works for historic America to be replaced by a different America.
For them, it is not a hobby or pastime but a mission. They will never stop nor be satisfied. As the country becomes more permissive, this crowd keeps redefining what it means to be moral and tolerant so as to continually remain “above” the rest of America. It is a one-upmanship. This has led, for example, to their silly new definition of torture: playing loud music in front of Islamic terrorists.
More than mere liberalism, unique to the Upper West Side crowd is a haughty anti-Americanism reinforced by members living in a cocooned, chosen ghetto apart from and disdainful of the American people and “the American way.” This crowd routinely snickers at regular Americans and views the military as unrefined, as red-neck types.
Its university-educated youth redrink what they already imbibed from mother’s milk, namely, that America is racist and imperialistic. It finds, therefore, common cause and political identity with any group -- be it domestic or foreign -- that condems American society or the American people. For them, groups that are anti-American are comrades.
Beyond question, this crowd is animated by a few core beliefs: it is anti conservative Christianity. It views most Americans as uneducated and red-necky -- certainly unsophisticated. Its loyalty is never to nationalism, rather to transnationalism. It fears physically strong men. Though itself white, it considers the American white race racist. It finds patriotism corny, even abhorrent. And as Leftists, they have recently become even anti-Israel, uncomfortable with a nationalism that seeks to preserve a Jewish State. Most of all, it has an axe to grind, a chip on its shoulder.
How can this crowd possess, one is prompted to ask, such negative feelings about America and Americanism when those of us in the country know of America’s goodness and the goodwill of its people?
The answer is simple. They do not know America, for they do not live in our America, regular America. They talk and socialize primarily with each other, or the likeminded. They have a very protected and gilded sphere of orbit. What they know of America comes from the TV shows Hollywood produces, the shows that denigrate white Christian America.
They speak of “our values”, which is their insider euphemism for how better and more moral they are than the rest of us. Yes, they are snobs who view themselves as a social class above.
When traveling in America beyond New York, it is mostly for purposes of expose -- in other words, finding situations that can be used to indict American society. After finding fault with “America’s indifference to suffering,” they return to their luxurious doorman apartments in Manhattan. They relish indicting America so as to affirm their “higher” social conscience. They are the anointed not because of any good deeds but because of what they espouse. Never has America seen a more self-righteous and bloated ego-centric group of people.
But don’t they care what the American people think of their disloyal actions? No, you and I are not important to them. All that matters to them are the opinions and the judgment of those in their closely-knit society, their sub-culture.
But don’t they fear the Islamic enemy? No, for this elitist crowd thinks that the jihadists will embrace them as brothers in their war against “racist America.” After all, the crowd has telegraphed to the enemy how it “understands” and how American policies have created the jihadist warrior for Islam. Such fools!
The truth is they do not live in the world of reality. They live in a make-believe world only money and privilege can buy. For many, political agitation is a form of entertainment. Having more than most Americans, they are bored and need to push the political envelope further each day. But their boredom is dangerous.
Indeed, the crowd that considers itself so clever and interesting is quite short-sighted. They are acting like children. They have not grown up, and remain fixated on the 60s, the “glory days” of their youth. They are yearning to bring down a government, as did their predecessors, with a Watergate or Pentagon Papers. Bowling is not their game.
For some, being politically “sophisticated” is in the short term more important than long-term survival. While they may be suicidal, the rest of us who live in reality would rather act responsibly and choose life. Certainly, choose country.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright © 2006 HUMAN EVENTS. All Rights Reserved.
by Rabbi Aryeh Spero Posted Jun 30, 2006
It is not “the people’s right to know” that pushes the New York Times to publicize classified national security secrets, rather its hope of creating conditions that will cause the defeat of our military and embarrassment worldwide of a defeated America. The public’s right to know is ignored in its pages when it comes to publicizing our victories in the War on Terror and the heroism of our soldiers. What motivates the New York Times is more “our enemies’ right to know.”
Why does the Times do whatever it can to demoralize our troops, cast them as blood-thirsty, bring about humiliation of President Bush and America, and even offer its pages for op-eds by a known al Qaeda terrorist, romanticizing the jihadist cause? Why is it helping our enemies and imperiling our safety and the safety of our children?
It is because the New York Times is not some inanimate object but the propaganda organ of a particular crowd, real people on Manhattan’s Upper West Side, who wish to run the country and control our domestic and foreign policy even though they have not been elected to do so. Because this crowd sees itself as superior to the rest of us and our institutions, and smugly scorns that which was once termed “the American Way,” they have placed themselves in a battle mode hostile and counter to all we hold dear. Our defeat is their victory.
If they can bring down the military, they can force the United States to go the negotiation route where they, not the generals, hold sway. If they can demonize the soldier, they assume we will look to them for “working things out” with the outside forces. If America can be defeated, then “the American Way” of strength against our enemies will be discredited, thereby opening the way for them, the cosmopolitans and transnationalists, to determine within their international fraternity the destiny of America. Bottom line: they wish to control America’s destiny.
But how can Americans living in America, one wonders, be so anti-American? Answer: it is not the physical land between the Atlantic and Pacific they detest. It is the American system: the system that gives the individual American political conservative living in Frankfurt, Kentucky, the same one-man-one-vote power as the editor of the New York Times. And, who is that “hick” congressman to have more power than the enlightened editorial board of the New York Times? It is the American ethos that looks to the military, the Judeo-Christian religious ethic, and the historic American way that riles the publisher and cohorts of the New York Times who feel entitled to America’s homage and political servitude.
They crave a new system that will severely diminish the power of the American citizen -- the rugged individual -- and place it in their hands, in their crowd. They support and call for socialist policies not because they want an equality that would slice their earnings or reduce their high-flying lifestyle to that of the average Joe in Milwaukee. They desire a dependency and collectivism, since they believe they'll, as in all democratic-socialist entities, be running the bureaucracies that will control our lives. They will social engineer society, all the while keeping for themselves the wealth, status and power (above the people) they deem rightfully theirs.
What type of person possesses such arrogance? Elitists, like the New York Times crowd who know they are superior. A crowd that does not accept you as an intellectual, social and political equal. They “care” for you only as their ward, with they above and you below -- all in the name of compassion and equality.
This crowd points to America as the source of all trouble in the world, as do the Europeans, because they think like Europeans, not Americans. They admire Paris, not Peoria. They live here, get rich here and gain power here, but respect the “sophistication” of Stockholm more than the “plainness” of Missouri. They want to reshape America into a Europeanism. Michael Wolff of New York Magazine bragged: “I’m not an American. I’m a New Yorker.” In other words, they are cosmopolitans of the world, above the plebians in Witchita.
The liberalism of the New York Times is different, for example, than that of the millions of individual liberals across the country or even that of, say, the Washington Post. The New York Times expresses the views of a specific crowd that congregates in a physical location primarily in Manhattan’s Upper West Side and, now, upper east side. It is a crowd that has never been comfortable with mainstream America and Americanism. Thus its anti-Americanism comes naturally, and easily. The anti-Americanism that horrifies us is part of their decades-old mindset. It comes with that neighborhood.
Unlike the liberalism of ideology seen in other parts of America, the anti-American leftism of the Upper West Side/New York Times crowd is akin to a heritage, passed down from generation to generation within the families living there. Additionally, contra-Americanism is their identity, a raison d’etre of this particular community. With all its wealth, power and privilege, it still feels alien to historic America and hopes and works for historic America to be replaced by a different America.
For them, it is not a hobby or pastime but a mission. They will never stop nor be satisfied. As the country becomes more permissive, this crowd keeps redefining what it means to be moral and tolerant so as to continually remain “above” the rest of America. It is a one-upmanship. This has led, for example, to their silly new definition of torture: playing loud music in front of Islamic terrorists.
More than mere liberalism, unique to the Upper West Side crowd is a haughty anti-Americanism reinforced by members living in a cocooned, chosen ghetto apart from and disdainful of the American people and “the American way.” This crowd routinely snickers at regular Americans and views the military as unrefined, as red-neck types.
Its university-educated youth redrink what they already imbibed from mother’s milk, namely, that America is racist and imperialistic. It finds, therefore, common cause and political identity with any group -- be it domestic or foreign -- that condems American society or the American people. For them, groups that are anti-American are comrades.
Beyond question, this crowd is animated by a few core beliefs: it is anti conservative Christianity. It views most Americans as uneducated and red-necky -- certainly unsophisticated. Its loyalty is never to nationalism, rather to transnationalism. It fears physically strong men. Though itself white, it considers the American white race racist. It finds patriotism corny, even abhorrent. And as Leftists, they have recently become even anti-Israel, uncomfortable with a nationalism that seeks to preserve a Jewish State. Most of all, it has an axe to grind, a chip on its shoulder.
How can this crowd possess, one is prompted to ask, such negative feelings about America and Americanism when those of us in the country know of America’s goodness and the goodwill of its people?
The answer is simple. They do not know America, for they do not live in our America, regular America. They talk and socialize primarily with each other, or the likeminded. They have a very protected and gilded sphere of orbit. What they know of America comes from the TV shows Hollywood produces, the shows that denigrate white Christian America.
They speak of “our values”, which is their insider euphemism for how better and more moral they are than the rest of us. Yes, they are snobs who view themselves as a social class above.
When traveling in America beyond New York, it is mostly for purposes of expose -- in other words, finding situations that can be used to indict American society. After finding fault with “America’s indifference to suffering,” they return to their luxurious doorman apartments in Manhattan. They relish indicting America so as to affirm their “higher” social conscience. They are the anointed not because of any good deeds but because of what they espouse. Never has America seen a more self-righteous and bloated ego-centric group of people.
But don’t they care what the American people think of their disloyal actions? No, you and I are not important to them. All that matters to them are the opinions and the judgment of those in their closely-knit society, their sub-culture.
But don’t they fear the Islamic enemy? No, for this elitist crowd thinks that the jihadists will embrace them as brothers in their war against “racist America.” After all, the crowd has telegraphed to the enemy how it “understands” and how American policies have created the jihadist warrior for Islam. Such fools!
The truth is they do not live in the world of reality. They live in a make-believe world only money and privilege can buy. For many, political agitation is a form of entertainment. Having more than most Americans, they are bored and need to push the political envelope further each day. But their boredom is dangerous.
Indeed, the crowd that considers itself so clever and interesting is quite short-sighted. They are acting like children. They have not grown up, and remain fixated on the 60s, the “glory days” of their youth. They are yearning to bring down a government, as did their predecessors, with a Watergate or Pentagon Papers. Bowling is not their game.
For some, being politically “sophisticated” is in the short term more important than long-term survival. While they may be suicidal, the rest of us who live in reality would rather act responsibly and choose life. Certainly, choose country.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright © 2006 HUMAN EVENTS. All Rights Reserved.
Wonder if the Air Force could take the place out just in case. Solve a lot of problems. Make America a much friendlier place anyway.
If the Bush administration does nothing about the NYT, then they are enabling the NYT.
Amen Rabbi
If you ask me, the Bush Administation needs to grow some brass ones in MANY areas....
I have always believed this about most of the media.
The New York Times is in a unique position. On the one hand other media came out with the same story. On the other, if they emphasize that such undermines their haughty self-appointed role as America's Paper of Record.
Maybe someone has more information why the Times should be selected for particular attack, but I don't see it.
It looks like a broad leak. Who's the leaker/s?
NEW YORK SLIMES(Alias Times)....They LOVE the Ennemy....Bow Down....Get on their knees....make LOVE....(The left might ask you what the definition of is is)....with our enemies!!!! NYT, part of Our enemies 5th Column!!!!:-(
Welcome aboard. Good article, even worth posting twice. :-)
About the only reason I can find for this hatred is their view that the 2000 election was stolen from Al Gore and likely the 2004 election too was manipulation of the ignorant masses to beat John Kerry.
Bump for the Action Alliance!
My vote is on (Listen, CIA!) Jay Rockefeller! The memo detailed this strategy, months ago. And he's a proven leaker, and an inside elitist as well.
Dang, this is dead on. It says what people have been thinking for a long time. We have often become maddened by the snobbish elite but this is plain-spoken and accurate.
I am especially intruiged by the notion of activism as 'entertainment'. No one stops them, nobody says no to them, and they just keep pushing it further and further --- because it's fun.
They don't really mean any of their 'ideas'. It's just fun.
I'd suggest someone ask him if he was the source.
Good Article
The times is a useful faction of the"agenda"
I don't think even that is enough to account for this insane hatred. To the pint of wanting (and I am sure of this) suicide bombers in America. I think they are really hooping for that.
I can't account for it. Maybe, since he is from a wealthy old New England family, a betrayer of his class?
Or, more likely, that he is openly religious and the Homosexual Agenda is strongly in control among the elitists?
Hatred for GW is for one reason and one reason only. He doesn't embrace the Liberal Agenda. It's no more complicated than that.
Libs hate *ANYONE* who doesn't agree with them. We all know that.
Amen, Rabbi. Please come and preach at my church whenever you like.
If the Bush administration does nothing about the NYT,
then they are enabling and encouraging and supporting
all the traitors at the NYT.
About the only reason I can find for this hatred is their view that the 2000 election was stolen from Al Gore and likely the 2004 election too was manipulation of the ignorant masses to beat John Kerry.
I think they hate W because he stands for everything American that they hate. To them, he represents the common man, the common America. In their elitist hubris, they see him as representing everything that is antiethical to their whole existence and reason for being.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.