Astonishment watch: Only in the New York Times!

WEDNESDAY, JULY 13, 2016

Where do they find these people:
We're often amazed by the work we find in the New York Times.

This morning, we were amazed by the third paragraph of the paper's featured, front-page news report.

Harris and Landler wrote the news report about Obama's speech in Dallas. In paragraph three, the scribes made the highlighted statement shown below.

We'll ask a question we've asked many times. Where do they find these people?
HARRIS AND LANDLER (7/13/16): Addressing a crowd of 2,000 at a concert hall, the president chided the police for not understanding what he called the legitimate grievances of African-Americans, who he said were victims of systemic racial bias.

“We cannot simply turn away and dismiss those in peaceful protest as troublemakers or paranoid,” Mr. Obama said to applause. “We can’t simply dismiss it as a symptom of political correctness or reverse racism. To have your experience denied like that, dismissed by those in authority, dismissed perhaps even by your white friends and co-workers and fellow church members again and again and again—it hurts.”
Was the president "chiding the police" when he made those remarks? We can't find that provocative, divisive claim justified in his actual text, and it seems to fly in the face of Obama's overall comments.

We're amazed, again and again, by what we see in the New York Times. We're constantly amazed and appalled.

Where in the world do they find these people? What have we done to deserve this?

16 comments:

  1. Obama's speech was vague enough so that different people will hear his words differently. In the above quote, he chides "those in authority". Which people in authority is he referring to?
    -- His own administration? (of course not)
    -- The Democratic politicians who run almost all the cities with large black populations? (of course not)
    -- Republicans (but the problems arise in Demcraticic cities)
    -- The police?

    IMHO you can't blame Harris and Landler for interpreting "Those in authority" to include policemen. If that's a misinterpretation, it's one that was invited by the President's choice of words.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bob Somerby and those who follow him are the only ones allowed to determine what someone "seemed" to say. Or "implied."


      Bob Somerby and those who follow him are allowed to insist on strict literal use of words when it suits them. Others who do so show signs of mental illness or brain damage.

      Delete
    2. Follow Bob? LOL! Who do YOU follow?

      Delete
    3. Spellcaster.

      Delete
  2. Obviously, CONSERVATIVES are the only experts on language and what was MEANT by what was SAID that THEY HEARD. Clearly, saying ANYTHING other than "Trump and the GOP are the greatest living beings ever" is received by them 'clutching pearls on their fainting couches' as an insult. They always say "Vague" or "I don't understand" or "It was Hebrew to me". Sounds like a personal problem to me. Of course different people interpret things differently... CONSERVATIVES always react with OUTRAGE or they don't understand basic noun verb structure. Again, YOUR PROBLEM, not ours. And you can BLAME the writers in the NY Times... for WHAT THEY WRITE. Sheezz... UNDERSTAND THAT ?!?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One question, Gamaroc: In your opinion, which people in authority was the President talking about?

      Delete
  3. Lt. Bob Kroll, president of the Minneapolis Police Federation, Steve Loomis, Cleveland, Police Union leader, just to name two, in my opinion. Look, I KNOW police have a tough job but these people, in my opinion, require blind loyalty. And I am on the record... I love robot bombs, when necessary.

    ReplyDelete
  4. We are often amazed when Bob Somerby ignores the standards he himself set.

    In this post does Bob cuff aside the New York Times for using "chide" or should he have chided them for not using "cuffed aside" to describe Obama's words?

    From the incompaarable archives:

    "RED AND BLUE TOGETHER: Watching the story-line change!

    THURSDAY, JUNE 25, 2015

    Part 3—A move toward massive resistance: In this morning’s New York Times, a single letter chides Roxane Gay for the way she cuffed the victims’ families aside in yesterday's op-ed column.

    Click here, scroll down to third letter."

    Follow this link:
    http://dailyhowler.blogspot.com/2015/06/red-and-blue-together-watching-story.html

    Then follow Bob's link to the letter in question and see for yourself if the Times did not follow the Howler example in the use of "chide". In our view the Times clearly did.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You should compile all of the contradictions in the Howler archives and send them to Kurt Gödel.

      Delete
    2. He'd still be dead.

      Delete
    3. You can lead a horse to water, ...

      Delete
    4. ...and then profess amazement when, after you drink, the horse follows suit.

      Delete
    5. 10:28 thinks that after Pythagoras died, a*a + b*b no longer equaled c*c.

      Delete
    6. 10:28 urges you should send your comment to Pythagoras and see if he and Kurt Godel give a rat's patoot.

      If they do Bob's Analysts will give you the bunk of your choice.

      Delete
  5. I was glad to see bob touch on this. I was on facebook this morning and saw a lot of memes about the president's speech from various conservative leaning pages expressing disdain for the president and his remarks (mostly pages created by self proclaimed patriots with profile pictures of Reagan and bald eagles). So I then went online and found the transcript of what Obama said. it was like night and day.

    if you ask me, Obama was trying to put recent events in a larger context in a search for solutions, and paid more than enough respect to the fallen officers specifically and the tough job of police officers in general.

    but people don't want to hear that part of it. As the president said, they want to climb into their social media corners and just b*tch about what an a**hole the president is with people that already agree with them.

    ReplyDelete
  6. HOW TO RESTORE YOUR BROKEN MARRIAGE
    I will start by saying to all that have experience heart break and also can't do without their lover should please stop here and read up my story, So as you will know how to go solving or getting your ex back...Am writing this article to appreciate the good work of Dr GOODLUCK that helped me recently to bring back my fiance. My fiance broke up with me last three month because he thought i was cheating on him, so for the past three month now i have trying to plead with him but he still say the same thing that he does not want us to come back again that he can not trust me so i came in contact with Dr GOODLUCK, who told me that my lover is going to come back to me if i work with him so i did what he ask me to do,after that he will call me that within 17 hours that my lover is going to come back to me,can you believe that my lover is back to me ,he now love me more than before i am so happy, spell is good when you meet Dr GOODLUCK if you need his help contact him at his email goodluck05spellcaster@gmail.com and you can also whatapp him or call with his mobile +2349059610309 and i promise that he is going to help you with any problem OKay..

    ReplyDelete