Tuesday, June 9, 2015

Chicago Tribune's Steve Chapman on Black on White Crime: "You Don't Need to Know"

Kevin O'Malley is just the latest  victim of the endemic black criminal victimization of white Chicagoans. He was shot and murdered May 30th in Lakeview by a black thug.

Murder victim, Kevin O'Malley

Kristopher Pitts of Chicago's West side Humboldt Park was apprehended within minutes by Chicago Police and identified by witnesses as the shooter.

He had O'Malley's smart phone in his pocket and his fingerprints on a gun found nearby.

Pitts, who had travelled from the West side in search of white prey, was out on bail for felony assault of a Chicago cop.

But you don't need to know the fact that the victim, O'Malley, was white and that the alleged assailant was black.

That's, at least, according to the smug, smarmy Steve Chapman of the ever decreasingly credible Chicago Tribune.

We, along with most sentient people who still give the Chicago Tribune a shred of thought, have known for a long time that Chicago's sadly decrepit news organ regularly censors news of black on white crime.

Still, it's nice to hear a Tribune apparatchik unabashedly spew a lame rationale for such intellectual dishonesty, from his own mouth.

Here is the Chicago Tribune's Steve Chapman's flaccid pretext for censorship as introduced and quoted in WND:

"Tribune editors and columnists spend more time explaining why they do not report on racial violence in Chicago than actually reporting it. And for readers who wonder why the Trib is so heavily invested in ignoring and denying the epidemic of black-mob violence in Chicago, the Trib’s Steve Chapman has an answer: You are a racist for even asking."

“There are good reasons not to identify the attackers by race. It’s the newspaper’s sound general policy not to mention race in a story, whether about crime or anything else, unless it has some clear relevance to the topic.

“My question to readers accusing us of political correctness is: Why do you care so much about the attackers’ race? If you fear or dislike blacks, I suppose it would confirm your prejudice. But otherwise, it tells you nothing useful.”

Chapman said.
"You don't need to know"

Black on white criminal victimization in Chicago has reached endemic proportions which warrant public concern, public discussion and public action.

But to the cultural Marxists at the Chicago Tribune, you don't need to know about that.

In the hazy world of these journalistically pretentious, ideological warriors, only black lives matter.

Tuesday, June 2, 2015

Truman Capote on JFK as Peniculus

In one of the classical Latin comedies, Manaechmi, the ancient Roman writer, Plautus, had a character named Peniculus. That ulus at the end is a diminutive in Latin, so the name was a comic commentary on the fellow's somewhat tiny personal reproductive equipment.
Truman Capote

If American Presidents were historically referenced as Roman Emperors or medieval kings, as Rush Limbaugh refers to the Great Ronald Reagan as Ronaldus Magnus, Truman Capote practically referred to John F. Kennedy as Iohannes Peniculus.

In the supposedly definitive biography (Capote: A Biography, by Gerald Clarke, Simon & Schuster,1988) on the very gay and very self promotional 50s and 60s novelist, old Tru is quoted at length discussing the size (or lack thereof) of John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy and little brother Teddy Kennedy's male appendages.

From page 271 in Capote's own words:

"(Jackie) was hurt because (JFK) was banging all these other broads. She never said that, but I knew about it rather vaguely.

What I don't understand is why everybody said the Kennedys were so sexy. I know a lot about cocks...I've seen an awful lot of them. And if you put all the Kennedys together, you wouldn't have one good one.

I used to see Jack when I was staying with Loel and Gloria Guinness in Palm Beach. It had a little guest cottage with its own private beach. And he would come down so he could swim in the nude.

He had absolutely nuthin'! Bobby was the same way. I don't know how he had all those children. As for Teddy, forget it!"

And can you possibly get that from a better authority on the subject than Truman Capote? Like he said, "he's seen an awful lot of them."

Here's Truman Capote, in one of his rare, more or less, lucid appearances, discussing Sex, Love and Friendship as interviewed by David Frost in 1969: