My first encounter with Charles Blow was back in 2010 at a huge Dallas Tea Party rally.
He came to Dallas with a headline in mind: "Everybody at the tea party is racist". He was on a mission, a mission to tell the world that this spontaneous movement of Americans concerned about their kids' future was nothing more than another expression of racism.
Then he wrote one of the most outrageous columns in recent memory:
"I had specifically come to this rally because it was supposed to be especially diverse.And, on the stage at least, it was.The speakers included a black doctor who bashed Democrats for crying racism, a Hispanic immigrant who said that she had never received a single government entitlement and a Vietnamese immigrant who said that the Tea Party leader was God.It felt like a bizarre spoof of a 1980s Benetton ad."
First, no one told Mr. Blow that the meeting was going to diverse. He was simply told that it was gathering of Americans concerned about what was going on in their country. It was Mr. Blow who went around counting "skin color" and drawing bizarre conclusions.
I know personally the people that Mr. Blow was mocking. They are good decent people who had never spoken at a political rally but who felt compelled to get involved this time around.
Frankly, I've never been able to read anything from Mr. Blow again. He is a "racialist", a man obsessed with skin color rather than what people have to say. Mr. Blow is Exhibit A in the corrupt relationship between "the race hustlers" and the Democrat Party!
A week ago, Mr. Blow wrote another column, one about his son stopped by the police. Mr. Blow's obsession with skin color would not allow him to put the Michael Brown story behind, even after AG Holder decided not to go after Officer Wilson.
So he wrote a story about his son being stopped by a police officer. It was "the Blow version" of the Michael Brown story. However, Mr. Blow omitted a few facts and now looks even more foolish than ever.
The NY Post has the details:
"At The New York Times, it seems, some key facts are just not fit to print when they don’t fit the liberal narrative.That appears to be the case with Charles Blow’s column in Monday’s edition of the paper. It was about how his son, a student at Yale, had been “accosted by a campus police officer, at gunpoint!”Blow, who is black, described his horror at learning how the officer questioned his son, Tahj, who’s also black, with gun drawn -- presumably because of his son’s race.“In these moments,” he wrote, “what you’ve done matters less than how you look.” In tweets, Blow invoked hashtag slogans from the Michael Brown and Eric Garner cases, #BlackLivesMatter and #ICantBreathe, saying his son’s experience shows why young black men are right to fear cops.Yet in his entire 867-word piece, and in all his tweets, Blow omitted a key fact: The officer who drew his gun is also black.OK, maybe Blow didn’t think this was relevant -- black cops can be biased, too. But why not let readers decide for themselves?There were other omissions and distortions.Yale’s police chief, for example, is also black.And while Blow did concede his son was stopped because cops were responding to a call about a burglary suspect who fit Tahj’s description, a Yale official says Blow’s claim that his son was “accosted” is “deeply inaccurate.”
In the meantime, let me remind you of a lesson I learned in 2010: Charles Blow is full of crap and a lot more! My guess is that The NY Times will keep relying on his "racialist view" of the world!
P.S. You can hear my show: CantoTalk or follow me on Twitter
Tags: Charles Blow, The New York Times To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
