Overnight, John bitterly complains… that The New York Times apparently mentions Emmett Till’s lynching (wait for it!) too-often.
This, John (the uber-genius that he is!) says reflects media’s leftward biases: “which is a pretty brilliant analysis of how the press operates, and why it influences us even when we are aware of its profound bias….”
Huh. I guess I missed that memo. I guess I wasn’t aware that this is a partisan issue: Republicans think lynchings are… a good thing(?). And… that only Democrats would call out the gang murder of a 14 year old boy for no reason at all — even if it was a half century ago(?).
John suggests that since the NYT and WaPo rarely mentioned the Till lynching before the late 1990s… (due to fear of stirring things up, in all likelihood — and clearly wrong…) that “making it right, here” decades later in time — as Exhibit A, for why lynching is a bad thing… reflects some illogical left-ward bias.
I primarily note John’s illogical, incoherent lunacy here — because it actually provides a window into how he, and like minded others, view racial lynchings. John wants to ignore them — write them out of class-room curricula.
John feels we should forget the ugly past, when black people were (mostly for no reason at all) publicly lynched from Minnesota, to Mississippi — from Oregon to Washington, DC. He so wants to forget it, because he knows his forebears’ (and his) hands drip… drip… drip, with the victims’ blood, still.
Emmett Till. Say his name.
Powerline Lies... 