NY Times Goes Hunting for Racist 'Ultraconservatives' in Ohio Who Won't Support Obama
The New York Times sent reporter Sabrina Tavernise to the battleground state of Ohio, to the blue-collar town of Steubenville in pursuit of a pet theory: Barack Obama may struggle to win because some whites are racist. Tavernise starts by suggesting this could be a problem with Democrats, but “ultraconservatives” quickly surface.
The locals were most quotable in the Times when made undocumented suggestions like “you had all these whites saying, ‘Oh, there’s another vote from some drug addict.’” They also associated the notion of racial discrimination in job interviews with anti-Obama sentiment:
Stephanie Montgomery, who is black and a graduate of Franciscan University in Steubenville, said her race came up so often in her job search in this area that she developed a technique for recognizing when it was happening. The sign: when warmth on the phone turns cool in person, and “they lose eye contact with you.”
“You almost need a corporate environment to get a fair shot,” she said while standing at a job fair in the Steubenville mall. She said that she did not vote for Mr. Obama in 2008 because she preferred Mr. McCain’s more conservative platform, but that Mr. Obama seemed to be a lightning rod for criticism, in part because of his race.
“He’s everything they hate,” she said, referring to ultraconservatives. “An affirmative-action baby. Got the Nobel Prize without deserving it.”
Franciscan University is a very traditional Catholic college (my son attended it for a year). It’s very pro-life, so it would make sense that Montgomery might not be your ideal Obama voter in 2008. But did she say “ultraconservatives,” or is the Times suddenly projecting?
Here was Tavernise’s methodology in her hunt for racism: "In 50 interviews in this county over three days last week, 5 people raised race directly as a reason they would not vote for Mr. Obama," Tavernise reports. She di not ask "specifically about race, but about their views on the candidates generally," so that "those who raised the issue did so of their own accord."
As James Taranto at The Wall Street Journal theorized, “If 45 of 50 interview subjects didn't mention race, one could just as easily take the position that the glass is 90% full rather than 10% empty.” But Tavernise and the Times felt that even a small amount of what they perceive to be racism could be crucial in a close election.
It’s also ridiculous for the Times to imply through its mining for quotes that the concept that Obama “got the Nobel Prize without deserving it” is racist. Obama felt he won the Nobel Prize without deserving it.
Tavernise sometimes didn't find the quotes that actually would match her thesis:
Many who raised race as a concern cast Mr. Obama as a flawed candidate carried to victory by blacks voting for the first time. Others expressed concerns indirectly, through suspicions about Mr. Obama’s background and questions about his faith.
“He was like, ‘Here I am, I’m black and I’m proud,’ ” said Lesia Felsoci, a bank employee drinking a beer in an Applebee’s. “To me, he didn’t have a platform. Black people voted him in, that’s why he won. It was black ignorance.”
Louis Tripodi, a baker in Steubenville who voted for Mr. Obama, blames talk radio and Republican rhetoric for encouraging such attitudes. “ ‘He’s a Muslim, he’s a socialist, he’s not born in this country,’ ” he said. “It’s got a lot to do with race.”
Anyone who reads these sentences can see it’s the liberal who brings up Obama’s background and faith, and assumes it's "racist" for radio hosts to suggest Obama is selling socialistic ideas like nationalizing the auto companies and the health care system. Felsoci was talking about blacks voting overwhelmingly for Obama. It might not be “black ignorance,” in that black voters are stupid, but it might be “black disinterest in the facts, voting blindly on race.”
See Samuel L. Jackson: "I voted for Barack because he was black. Cause that's why other folks vote for other people -- because they look like them...That’s American politics, pure and simple. [Obama’s] message didn’t mean [bleep] to me.”
But the Times never noticed that comment.
When recent polls show black voters prefer Obama 90 percent to 4, why isn’t the Times sending one of their reporters into neighborhood bars to ask them if they’re racist? If as the Times suggests in its headline, that it's sad "Race Is Still an Issue for Some Voters," can we expect a reporter tsk-tsking at black tribalism?
- Tim Graham's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Blacks CAN'T be racist!
Submitted by Annie Ashe Fields on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 7:56am.
The OPPRESSED class of people CAN'T be racist because they don't have the POWER.
That's how it was explained to me once.
Well, fine.
We'll see how hard they hold on to that b.s. once we hit 2025 and become a majority afro-chicano nation as the demographers anticipate.
Oh, It'll hold.
Submitted by Name on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 8:24am.
That's where the 'White hispanic' comes in. There will still be racist liberal morons like this claiming racism.
I thought we were in the 21st century
Submitted by DontFeedTheTrolls on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 8:46am.
Yes, Obama, the President of the United States of America, has no power because he's black and oppressed.
And Tiger Woods can't be number 1 at golf because he's black and oppressed.
And Oprah Winfrey can't have millions of dollars, her own magazine and TV show, because she's black and oppressed.
I could go on.
95% of Black Voters...
Submitted by bigdaddy on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 11:16am.
...Approve of Baracko's skin color...
Except
Submitted by panzerakc on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 7:53pm.
for those that don't think he's "black enough".
Whatever that means.
Last year
Submitted by gwalt on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 8:12am.
My Minlaw calls blacks ni@@gers.
My Finlaw calls blacks c@@ns.
They are both Über Libs.
When I brought up Big Government and that I was opposed to it, they called me a racist. See how that works?
And they still wonder why we haven't asked them to vacation with us the last three years.
"A lot of briefing for a 2 hr. special with Dan Rather. Saw the show & wonder why we bothered". Ronald Reagan
We should reclassify
Submitted by gwalt on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 8:13am.
Instead of calling it racist language ( n-word and c-word-- c@@ns) lets call it Liberal slang.
"A lot of briefing for a 2 hr. special with Dan Rather. Saw the show & wonder why we bothered". Ronald Reagan
Who is more racist
Submitted by g00se99 on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 8:21am.
Who is more racist? Whites who give 35%+ for Obama or the current 94% black support he has? The numbers dont lie.
Typical New York Times
Submitted by Herbster on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 8:24am.
There they go again.......the New York Times...."All the news that fits" (Our agenda.)
And the hits just keep on comin'
Submitted by Annie Ashe Fields on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 8:35am.
Indeed. I just finished reading this unintentionally comical piece from NYT's former grand poobah Keller.
Are you sitting down? He wrote the following sentence about Fox & Roger Ailes without a TRACE if self-awareness. Zip. Zero. Nada:
"His newspapers hemorrhage money. The political clout that once justified all that red ink is waning..."
Now, I know NYT has seen a pleasant uptick in its digital subscriptions, but PUH-LEEZ. They are "the paper of record" and EVERYONE knows they are running on FUMES.
The UTTER lack of shame in these people never continues to amaze.
life has passed the Liberals by
Submitted by MidAmerica on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 8:38am.
Liberalism is dead.
The country and the world has a multitude of problems and the Libs have no policies to move the situations forward. They have no solutions and no real reason to reelect obama so all they can do is try to relive their glory years of the 50's and 60's civil rights movement.
Liberals are no longer proponents but are merely opponents. The budget is a good example, democrats have produced no budget in three years but stand in firm opposition to any Republican budget. They have traded principle for demagoguery.
Liberalism is dead.
Submitted by Huapakechi on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 10:16am.
So,These are zombies crushing our economy and regulating our businesses into bankruptcy?
Since zombies are already dead, they can be legally disassembled into harmless parts....
Think about it.
NECROPHOBE!
Submitted by MrSnuggles on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 11:39am.
NECROPHOBE!
well said
Submitted by gr29az on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 12:30pm.
well said
the rule at the NYT...
Submitted by c5then on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 8:51am.
if you don't find any racism, make it up because we "know" it is out there.
Madison and Jefferson and Franklin built a Republic - Roberts killed it!
i've been crying
Submitted by gr29az on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 12:04pm.
for term limits my whole life. that alone will solve the problems this government has created
But he DID, Blanche, He did!
Submitted by Texndoc on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 8:52am.
He DID get where he is only because of affirmative action. (Geraldine Ferraro, RIP, said it)
And he DIDN'T deserve a Nobel Peace Prize.
Oh well, they called first Democrat VP female candidate Ferraro a RACIST, too.
Race is still an issue for 95% of journalists
Submitted by forest on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 9:08am.
And I'd like to see the exact quotes from the 5 people who allegedly brought up race as a reason for not voting for Obama. For all I know, they could have not voted for him because he's half "typical white person".
And did she try to detect black voters who voted for Obama because of race? Did she look into why Obama carried about 90% of the black vote against Hillary Clinton, who had basically the same views and better name recognition?
This is just so laughable.
Submitted by cristo on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 9:39am.
This is just so laughable. Perhaps the N.Y. Times should try another long-distance run to say, St. James, Long Island, that hot bed of racism, where Solidad Obrien was molded into the radical black/latina revolutionary she is today, and ask 50 people at random how they feel.
Or maybe out to eastern Connecticut where Time's editor Jill Abramson has a "country home," where she lives with her dog Scout (named after what, you suppose?) and see if there's 5 in 50 who might just utter the same sentiments as the good folks of Ohio. (check this link while you're at it: http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/ct/default.asp) If Obama loses, it will not be because a handful of people in Ohio may or may not think he's Joe Cool, but because he's incapable of solving this country's problems and has made a good number of people afraid for the future of the United States.
ultra conservatives are not
Submitted by gr29az on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 9:52am.
ultra conservatives are not racist. we only hate his white half.
I'd like to see an article
Submitted by ant on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 11:17am.
I'd like to see an article derived from the obvious stereotype that liberal female, NY journalists always look like they're wearing the same clothes that they wore while sleeping in the woods and unable to bathe for days.
Do ultraconservatives have any super-powers, and have they ever fought Mothra or Godzilla?
voting ultra-conservatives
Submitted by pockets64 on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 11:33am.
Considering the ultra conservatives didn't vote for him the first time around, I don't see how having them not vote for him again will change the outcome the second time around.
I think it's really about
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 11:55am.
getting that white guilt going. If some white people won't vote for BO because he's black, other people should, just to prove how non bigoted they are.
It's kinda like
Submitted by panzerakc on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 7:57pm.
a bumper sticker I saw that said, "If you voted for Obama in '08 to prove you weren't racist, vote against him in '12 to prove you're not stupid".
nobama
Submitted by mmilesll on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 1:11pm.
The LSM is setting up for a nobama loss. Let's how many racist we can find, let's see how many hate groups we can find, all to prove to themselves that nobama didn't win because America is full of racist. What crap. The real reason nobama is not going to win is because the last 3 years have been a disaster, doesn't matter if nobama were purple, his is a clown and had the LSM done their job he never would have been elected.
This is a result of liberals
Submitted by CM on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 2:01pm.
This is a result of liberals living in an echo chamber. They never encounter a conservative opinion so they can't comprehend someone genuinely disagreeing with obama. The only explanation they can come up with is that the person must be racist.
It would be interesting to see a tv show where a liberal spends 30 days with a conservative. It'll never happen though.
Yahoo news is certainly no
Submitted by Slyrr on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 3:03pm.
Yahoo news is certainly no haven for GOP/Conservative types. They're as liberal and crazed as can be. But in reporting on Obama's campaign 'opening' speech, nearly ALL the comments I looked at were negative.
In commenting on how Obama is running for his second term, almost everything I saw was 'can't fool us again' and 'you have to be kidding', or something like it. Even the liberals infesting Yahoo news can't put any more polish on the festering dung heap that is the Obama administration.
People are in agony under this failed president, with Trillions of dollars wiped out because of his policies - millions put out of work. Government thugs running amok in our banks, our hospitals, and even our schools, terrifying children by ransacking their lunchboxes looking for 'contraband'. Inflation; skyrocketing. Unemployment; skyrocketing. Gas prices; skyrocketing. Misery, worry and fear; skyrocketing.
Not everything is skyrocketing of course. The value of the dollar is plummeting. Our respect around the world is plummeting. Morality is plummeting. I'm sure our liberal friends think that's all fine and dandy. Now France has a socialist (communist) president again, and the few people in France who have any money left are already starting to pack their bags and look for other countries to live. This is what happens with socialist and communist leaders - the people flee, take their money with them, and the commie countries have nothing left to tax.
'Everything except the rules got shorter and shorter.'
Racism
Submitted by boozy on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 5:55pm.
Racism...what a load of Sh** than song is...When the Leftards have to pull that out of their A** you know the Communists are in trouble....I say we deport all of them...send them to a country that can run their little piss ant lives to the fullest degree....Ain't going to happen here in America....I can guarantee that.
New York Times-brand birdcage liner™
Submitted by Phryj1 on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 7:44pm.
The ONLY birdcage liner that's already completely covered in fecal matter before it's even used.
Progressives seem to be completely averse to facts and logic. Apparently, reality has a conservative bias.
uhhhhhhhhh
Submitted by GregE on Sun, 05/06/2012 - 10:54pm.
“He’s everything they hate,” she said, referring to ultraconservatives. “......Got the Nobel Prize without deserving it.”
Uhhhh, is that something anyone is supposed to like? Everybody gets a trophy?
That's true, but
Submitted by Quasi-socialist on Mon, 05/07/2012 - 8:16am.
this is not to convince the ultra-conservatives. This is to scare the know-nothing middle away from "voting with" ultra-conservatives (or conservative). It is unfortunate, but a good segment of the middle in this country are people who seek to strike a balance in their life by avoiding what is presented to them as "extremes".
Also it is a play to the hide-the-conservatives right. If you remember after the McCain debacle--you know when that guy who built his career on playing to the middle got portrayed as "too far right" from all the media that used to pat his head and call him a "good conservative"--there were a number of centrists on the conservative side that said that McCain lost because the right-wing was allowed to say stuff and be heard saying stuff, and if they only had shut up, stayed in the back room and not made a peep, they would have "saved" us from Barack Obama, who their guy said would make a fine president. The hide-the-conservatives wing of the right is a version of the know-nothing middle only less manipulable by the media and more decided on some things. (Which is to say they show ample evidence of being manipulable by the media.)
Since centrist on the right already believe that people who are more conservative them them are "too far right", any play that the media makes to that idea finds some purchase in this segment of the categorical right.
In a recent bit of terminology, it invites the middle, centrists and certain brand of libertarians absolution for appearing to be too far from the middle, if they can just join in in making the cultural conservative "the other".
The NYT, the newspaper that
Submitted by Dau Tieng 59 on Mon, 05/07/2012 - 11:56am.
The NYT, the newspaper that has had to give back more Pulitzer Prizes than anyone else, because they were later found to be articles of fiction. "If the news don't fit; make it up!" Just mentioning.
From this report the only racism is the BO supporters saying the anti-BO people are racists.