That's pretty much what these racists are saying. They hate that others think black lives are important even when they don't have a ball or a microphone in their hands. Racists hate to be reminded they're racist.
Right Wacky?
Yes, I said so.
Racists.
Originally Posted by eccieuser9500
Right down the propaganda line of the NY Crimes - anyone not 'woke' is a "Racist".
Yet 9500 peersists inposting his Racist old dead white guy memes.
What a Hypocrite.
But - after all - its' all they got is to scream Racism and enable race hatred and riots in their effort to unseat Trump.
TDS on display.
Take a read here - 9500- but don't let the nukes from Eric swalwell go toyour head in Outrage_
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattve...lders-n2572756
Slated for Demolition? How The NYT Just Violated a Sacred Rule of the Woke Left
Matt Vespa
Posted: Jul 20, 2020 12:45 PM
The New York Times has got to go. It’s not because it’s liberal.
It’s not because they tossed out other liberals who held views that weren’t, you know, insane. Bari Weiss was one of the latest victims of the lefty mob, who just didn’t like her exposing their illiberal tendencies. These lefty crybabies are idiots in their politics, but they know the PR game. A prominent NYT writer ripping apart their arguments makes their defeat in the public arena more assured. Weiss had to go. Her scathing resignation letter just shows how intolerant, uninviting, and utterly insane the ‘woke’ ethos is—and why we all have a responsibility to stop these little Marxists wherever they may be. These folks have an agenda and a mindset that is not compatible with American values. Period.
For now, its Confederate statues, though it appears they have long moved on from that and are just for wanton destruction of property. No shocker; they’re a mob. Yet, the brand name flank maneuvers they’re pulling are equally nonsensical. When fruit snack names start hiding under the bed, you know we’re approaching peak insanity. Maybe we’ve already reached that, I don’t know. All I know is that the Times’ founding family were slaveholders, so I guess, based on the Left’s rules—either the family must resign, or the publication must go. These are your rules, lefties. The New York Post’s Michael Goodwin listed the very problematic history of the Ochs family. “It’s far worse than I thought,” he wrote:
It’s far worse than I thought. In addition to the many links between the family that owns The New York Times and the Civil War Confederacy, new evidence shows that members of the extended family were slaveholders.
Last Sunday, I recounted that Bertha Levy Ochs, the mother of Times patriarch Adolph S. Ochs, supported the South and slavery. She was caught smuggling medicine to Confederates in a baby carriage and her brother Oscar joined the rebel army.
I have since learned that, according to a family history, Oscar Levy fought alongside two Mississippi cousins, meaning at least three members of Bertha’s family fought for secession.
Adolph Ochs’ own “Southern sympathies” were reflected in the content of the Chattanooga Times, the first newspaper he owned, and then The New York Times. The latter published an editorial in 1900 saying the Democratic Party, which Ochs supported, “may justly insist that the evils of negro suffrage were wantonly inflicted on them.”
Six years later, the Times published a glowing profile of Confederate President Jefferson Davis on the 100th anniversary of his birth, calling him “the great Southern leader.”
Ochs reportedly made contributions to rebel memorials, including $1,000 to the enormous Stone Mountain Memorial in Georgia that celebrates Davis, Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson. He made the donation in 1924 so his mother, who died 16 years earlier, could be on the founders’ roll, adding in a letter that “Robert E. Lee was her idol.”
[…]
A week ago, I was “aware of no evidence or claims that any members of Bertha’s family owned slaves or participated in the slave trade.”
That statement is no longer accurate. I have found compelling evidence that the uncle Bertha Levy Ochs lived with for several years in Natchez, Miss., before the Civil War owned at least five slaves.
So, when will the historically illiterate 1619 project clowns stage an internal rebellion over this? They work for a paper that adored the Confederacy and owned slaves. They said nice things about Jefferson Davis. If nothing happens, then the ‘woke’ mob is failing to do their brand justice by no destroying this newspaper. The 1619 project morons are simply supporting slavery and white supremacy by staying silent on this. I’ve been told silence is violence. Well, what say you? You work for a paper that peddled in slavery and presumably live in a city that was named after one of the biggest slave traders in history, James, Duke of York, who eventually became James II, the last Catholic king of England.
We all know your ethos leaves no room for nuance. That’s the point. The standards are meant to be impossible so as to pave the way for destruction and woke reconstruction. Looks like some controlled burns are needed here, right? I mean, these are your rules, you progressive freaks. Until then, let the word go forth that the entire staff of The New York Times support white supremacy and their silence is causing violence to our country. Everyone who works there supports slavery too. I’m just going by the Left’s standards. Oh, this is such a fun game.
Thanks to DF for the original post!
