While on vacation last week, I received a memo from a mysterious, anonymous source, who claimed to be a friend of a friend of this blog and knew about my interest in Political Correctness. He suggested the memo could have plausibly originated from the Editor of a major Newspaper. I spent a fair amount of time convincing myself the memo was potentially accurate. My research uncovered two pieces of evidence to support the memo's authenticity. First, and most important, in an amazing coincidence, the memo was typed on the exact same typewriter that the Bush Texas Air National Guard memo was typed on! (I expect confirmation from Charles Johnson and the Powerline crew any minute now.) Second, when I thought about confirming its contents and provenance, I imagined talking to Dan Rather and determined he would have agreed it was probably "fake, but accurate". Based on this incontrovertible proof, I decided to reproduce the memo in its entirety (the original was chewed up by the dog):
To all new employees:
The *** **** ***** is determined to be the best newspaper in the world. We not only print all the important news (our motto: All the news that fits, we print) but, as a special extra bonus value, we show our readers exactly how they should understand its significance. This is not always an easy job since sometimes the news threatens to subvert our narrative. For that reason, all new employees receive this special memo detailing precisely how to determine what news is significant and how to tell who is the victim and who is the oppressor in all situations. The first rule to remember is that "all white men are oppressors" except those who have obtained enlightenment as determined by the editorial board of the *** **** *****. From there, it is a simple matter to use this chart to determine further refinements of the system. By adding and subtracting the specified amounts, you will be able to determine who has more bona fides as a victim; the higher the total number, the greater the degree of victimhood, which determines how your story should be written (including, of course, the requisite level of sympathy engendered.) Please memorize this list and then destroy this memo.
All men start at 0.
All women start at +5.
Ethnicity:
White: (M) -5 (F) 0
American Black: (M/F) +4
African Black: +5 if oppressed by whites (If not oppressed by Whites, no need to write about them since the editorial board doesn't think they are interesting enough to warrant more than an occasional story.)
American Hispanic: (M/F) +3 (American Hispanic with no accent are +1)
American Oriental: (M) 0 (F) -1 (-10 if Michelle Malkin)
Palestinian: (M) +5 (F) +2 (Add +2 if a suicide bomber.)
Religious Orientation
Christian: (M) -5 (F) -3
Minority Christian: (M/F) 0
Secular Christian: (M) +1 (F) +2 (Hillary Clinton +5)
Evangelical: (M/F) -5
Jewish: (M/F) 0
Orthodox Jewish: (M/F) -1
Ultra-Orthodox: (M/F) -3
Secular Jewish: (M/F)+2 (If pro Palestinian:+5)
Islamic: (M) +2 (F) -3
Fundamentalist Islam: (M) +5 (F) +5
Hindu: (Don't they live in India? No story here unless can be tied into stealing jobs from Americans.)
Socio-economic Class
American Poor: If a Minority, +2 for an unemployed male, +3 for an unemployed female, and +5 for an unemployed single mother. If White, -2 if a male (they are all racists) and -1 for a female; +2 if a single mother.
Non-American Poor: They can be ignored since there are so many of them.
Middle Class: If a Minority, ignore altogether as the safest course; if White, only write stories if they are critical of a Republican administration's failed economic policies.
Non American Middle Class: There aren't any, as far as the *** **** ***** ed. board can determine.
Wealthy: If Minority, only write rare stories about the lingering effects of racism. If White, see rates for political orientation.
Non American Wealthy: If they became rich through administering Western donations, especailly through the UN, ignore; if they became rich through business, they are oppressors and fair game.
Political Orientation:
Left/Liberal: (M) +3 (F) +5
Moderate: (M/F) 0
Conservative: If a White male, -2; a White female, -3; if a Minority male, -4; Minority female, -5.
Sexual Orientation:
Heterosexual: If male, married, and faithful, -4; if publicly found to be unfaithful, -2 unless on Larry King or Barbara Walters with their wife, in which case they have a +5 added. If they are found to be unfaithful with another man, +5. If a woman, fidelity is unimportant.
Homosexual: If male, +3; if HIV positive, +4. If female, +2.
Transgendered: +2 in all situations except +4 if their former spouse is publicly "understanding" of their tragic dilemma.
Special situations:
All who are pro abortion on demand without restrictions receive +5. All who support restrictions of any kind, receive -4, but Minority women receive -5.
If a person with a base score >0 has a disability, +4; if they have a base score <0, -4.
If a female with a base score >0 is young and attractive, +4, if blond +5; if young, attractive, blond, and a missing person believed to be the victim of foul play, +10. (If a Minority woman who is missing and believed to be the vicitim of foul play, can run a story about her in a 1:10 ratio with the blond female.)
This is not an exhaustive list but should be used as a guideline. If there is any doubt as to the degree of victimhood of an individual (perhaps due to confusion as to which identity group or groups they belong to) it is prudent to watch for indicators from the Editorial Board before pursuing a story about the person. As always, any story which helps the *** **** ***** in its goal of bringing balance, equality, and peace to the world should be pursued vigorously, unless it harms, directly or indirectly, any member of a designated victim group.
________________________________________________________________________
As I said earlier, I cannot say with complete certainty that this memo exists or ever existed, but it sounds like an almost authentic mockery. On the other hand, the MSM (and their allies in the Democratic party and academia), continues to distort the news it reports in ways which suggest they are, almost certainly in an unconscious way (to give the benefit of the doubt), following exactly the kind of script I have suggested. They offer examples everyday.
Recent Comments