Dueling NY Times writers: Are whites racist, or really racist?

A New York Times writer has shown his dexterity at walking the "acceptable racism" tightrope.  Lesson learned (again): as long as you tar the right race, the NYT won't fire or even reprimand you.

The Daily Caller notes some revealing tweets by Times contributor Brent Staples on the Michael Brown case in Ferguson, Missouri.  Responding to colleague Nicholas Kristof, Staples spelled out the "white view" of the "facts" of the case, in which Officer Darren Wilson shot and killed Brown after the latter robbed a convenience store and sought to grab the former's gun:

Making himself very clear, Staples alleged that a "[h]ealthy majority of white public support police action in death of blacks - no matter what."  "Lethal racism," indeed – perhaps Staples used the same model for that statistic that the Times been relying on for its reporting on anthropogenic global warming

The Daily Caller pays less attention to Kristof's tweets, but they are worth some focus, too.  Kristof sparked Staples's tirade by comparing Michael Brown and Tamir Rice – not so much regarding the facts of the respective cases, or the characters of the two youths, but rather whether "activists" would have been smarter to focus more on Rice rather than Brown.  Better, Kristof contends, to use a "more clearcut" case to "persuade people of a problem."  (Recall that these activists' version of persuasion involved looting, rioting, and the assassination of two policemen.)

Shades of the Wellstone memorial here, where Democrats elected to remember the dead with a foot-stomping political rally.  The fact that a twelve-year-old was shot is not so important as the value of that tragedy in pushing a certain narrative.

It's safe to say that white Kristof's and black Staples's takes on the situation are not "normative" – though they might constitute the normative view at the New York Times.

Drew Belsky is American Thinker's deputy editor.  Contact him at drew@americanthinker.com, and follow him on Twitter @DJB627.

A New York Times writer has shown his dexterity at walking the "acceptable racism" tightrope.  Lesson learned (again): as long as you tar the right race, the NYT won't fire or even reprimand you.

The Daily Caller notes some revealing tweets by Times contributor Brent Staples on the Michael Brown case in Ferguson, Missouri.  Responding to colleague Nicholas Kristof, Staples spelled out the "white view" of the "facts" of the case, in which Officer Darren Wilson shot and killed Brown after the latter robbed a convenience store and sought to grab the former's gun:

Making himself very clear, Staples alleged that a "[h]ealthy majority of white public support police action in death of blacks - no matter what."  "Lethal racism," indeed – perhaps Staples used the same model for that statistic that the Times been relying on for its reporting on anthropogenic global warming

The Daily Caller pays less attention to Kristof's tweets, but they are worth some focus, too.  Kristof sparked Staples's tirade by comparing Michael Brown and Tamir Rice – not so much regarding the facts of the respective cases, or the characters of the two youths, but rather whether "activists" would have been smarter to focus more on Rice rather than Brown.  Better, Kristof contends, to use a "more clearcut" case to "persuade people of a problem."  (Recall that these activists' version of persuasion involved looting, rioting, and the assassination of two policemen.)

Shades of the Wellstone memorial here, where Democrats elected to remember the dead with a foot-stomping political rally.  The fact that a twelve-year-old was shot is not so important as the value of that tragedy in pushing a certain narrative.

It's safe to say that white Kristof's and black Staples's takes on the situation are not "normative" – though they might constitute the normative view at the New York Times.

Drew Belsky is American Thinker's deputy editor.  Contact him at drew@americanthinker.com, and follow him on Twitter @DJB627.