When I read in-house policy stories in the Los Angeles Titanic, I commonly have the feeling they were crafted by a fellow who reads at least one story in a newspaper every day, whether he has time or not.
The shaky foundations of these thinly reasoned stories rests on a paper bowl of year-old jelly — they are not only tottering but smelly.
My favorite sample of We Don’t Need No Stinkin’ Reason piece from this morning’s edition, “Temecula’s mosque moment,” the third editorial in the op-ed section.
Don’t the boys who create these napkin-based pieces get out much? Did their television die? Do they only read stories with big pictures and little words? Was their internet repossessed. Was the electricity turned off for nonpayment?
If I lived in Wassila, as far from the center of the earth as is possible, surely I would have better sense than to say “I endorse building a mosque in Temecula.” Temecula? Is my sense of smell betraying me again?
Have you noticed: Everyone who opposes a cause the Titanic backs is “hysterical”? As regularly as the daily Knock Sarah pieces turn up on the Huffington Post, the Titanic races from zero-to-60 every time someone wants to stop Muslim terrorists from building in their neighborhood.
Do you want a mosque in your neighborhood?
A bulletin for the boys at the Titanic: Muslim fanatics are slaughtering groups who disagree with them all around the globe.
I Hate to Love Ya
The Titanic tells us slow-to-process types every morning that as mature liberals, they are blindly in love with the philosophy of cultural diversity. Liberal boys love theory. It’s the practice that bothers them. They just don’t want one of Those People living next door to them. Find a liberal who does not live in a lily-white neighborhood, and I will show you the rarest man in town.
Being liberal minded, they believe in mixing up the world with all kinds of people of color — except where they live.
My favorite line from the editorial was one that is used More by 18-year-olds rather than grownups. I quote:
“It isn’t fair to blame an entire political ideology or religion for the violent actions of extremists.”
Only if you are sitting atop a rotting pumpkin in the middle of the Gobi Desert and you haven’t seen another human since Millard Fillmore dropped dead leaving a Denny’s, are you excused.
Trying — but failing — to show they got religion, the Titanic says in the very next sentence, without using quote marks:
“Tea party” activists and right-wing commentators rightly pointed this out after they were accused of inciting the recent violence in Tucson that left six people dead and a congresswoman fighting for her life.
Here are three examples of Titanic hatred:
1. The Tea Party has been a viable movement for a year — but the Times mouth-foamingly hates non-liberals. Therefore, they pointedly demean the Tea Party by place it in quotes (meaning it ain’t really real or legitimate) and only using it in lower-case.
2. Trying to be provocative by arousing its base, the Titanic pejoratively referred to “right-wing” commentators instead of the more accurate, less offensive term “conservative.”
3. Finally, the Titanic itself accused the right of fomenting Tucson, and it was typically dishonest of the newspaper not to admit it.
So much for the stridently left newspaper’s sense of tolerance. If they tell you they are, they are lying.
