Thursday, June 29, 2023

the oregonian promotes its newest racist, reparations hoax

By Jerry PDX
thursday, june 29, 2023 at 5:51:00p.m. edt

Our local “news”paper is treating us to a recurring White guilt front-page series called “publishing prejudice.” It’s nothing we don’t already know about but our local media wants to drill it into our heads to keep Whites in a state of perpetual guilt:

Funny thing is, Albina, the area they are talking about, is the neighborhood my father’s relatives moved to when they came from North Dakota, along with many other scots, irish, french and native American-mixed people.

My mother grew up in a farm household in the Albina area, which was demolished during the reconstruction period they are talking about. The article suggests that only black people lost their homes but that’s ludicrous, Albina was not “all black,” not even close, and plenty of Whites lost their homes also, including other relatives and friends we knew.

This article also leaves out how the I5 freeway also cut through SE Portland, which was composed of mostly German, Russian, and Polish immigrant communities, which were forever changed. You don’t see those people claiming that losing their homes 70-80 years ago has caused “generational trauma” that has caused them to be poor forever.

Article is skimpy on statistics on how many blacks actually lost homes, but I can’t imagine looking at the information presented that more than a few hundred actually lost their homes.

Many more Whites than blacks likely lost homes, but the article ignores that.

There is an anecdotal story about a black business owner claiming he got less for his property than a White one but that’s not evidence, just a story. If they had numbers backing up the notion that blacks all got a raw deal and Whites didn’t, I think they’d put them right out there. But that wouldn’t support the guilt trip they’re trying to lay on Whites.

I’m not saying there wasn’t bias or some black people could have gotten a raw deal but a lot of Whites could have also.


Anonymous said...

It doesn't take too long to inhale the scent of these pro-nig,anti-White stories.The first paragraph can be counted on having "disparity" pop up once or twice or "disproportionate",which of course are subjective words.They do not belong in an actual news story--and not one I'm going to spend my time on.

So I don't.


Anonymous said...

"reparations hoax"

The word "reparations" does not appear in the article. But you could be right in that the article and this series might be a setup for reparations. At least for the people who were forced to relocate decades ago. Or their descendants. Not sure how relevant it is for general reparations for slavery though.

On the surface it appears to be mostly about unfair "racist" reporting at the time by this media outlet/newspaper. A big teary wet mea culpa. It says:

"For the latest installment of The Oregonian/OregonLive’s series scrutinizing its racist legacy"

But there is no evidence that had people other than mostly Blacks been living in that neighborhood, they would not have been forced to move so the highway could be built.

This kind of "eminent domain" stuff has happened all over the country to all kinds of people. Odds are mostly Whites were affected, since America was (and still is for now) a mostly white country.

You can send your thoughts to them:

However that is probably a lost cause due to the female editor:

She seems like exactly the kind of white woman you do not want in charge of anything except maybe your kitchen or cleaning your house.

But you can email her too:

Anonymous said...


(ZH)In its 6-3 ruling, the Court's conservative majority ruled that the First Amendment bars Colorado from forcing "an individual to speak in ways that align with its views but defy her conscience about a matter of major significance."

Smith, who owns design company 303 Creative - which has previously served gay customers - only wants to work with heterosexual couples for her wedding website business. She argued that Colorado's law would force her and other artists to offer customized messages which violate her beliefs and First Amendment rights.

Supporters of Colorado's law say the decision could allow businesses to discriminate against a wide range of customers - including interfaith couples or those of other races.

In a dissent, Justice Sotomayor wrote: "Today, the Court, for the first time in its history, grants a business open to the public a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class--including,potentially interracial couples."

GRA:If this means what it sounds like(lol)--say no to blacks and gays(but I'm not holding my breath.)


Anonymous said...

jerry pdx
Bottomly eliminated comments in Oregonian and cancelled Dilbert, she defended her actions on her editorial page. As you might expect, her rationalizations were weak and motivated purely by woke ideology.

Anonymous said...

Against free speech,basically.The more this goes on,the more proud of censorship the commies become--and the more censorship they will attempt to impose.