Jump to content

Is the Kearny Observer the world’s worst newspaper?


Guest Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Guest

The Kearny Observer doesn't cover local elections. When school board members walk out of session in a huff, that story gets covered three weeks later. This so-called newspaper's failures have made it a joke for years.

Now, to top off its bad coverage, we get an ******** ******** editor named Karen Zautyk. This week's editorial, titled "At cross purposes with nonbelievers," is a piece of vindictive screed against atheists. There's no point asking whether Zautyk sees her own biases; clearly, she does not. Let's just cover a few of the lowlights. (I'd post the text of her little opus but the Observer hasn't put it on line yet.)

She asks why an atheist group would post a billboard expressing its beliefs instead of spending the money feeding the hungry or some other act of charity. Of course, she has no problem at all with all the Christian billboards, nativity displays and advertising – not to mention the churches and cathedrals, some of which cost millions of dollars to build and maintain. So for starters, she is being a hypocrite.

Then she criticizes a group called American Atheists (AA) for filing a lawsuit challenging the 9/11 cross at the World Trade Center. The lawsuit isn't going to win. The case will be analyzed the same way nativity scene cases are, so that if the entire display neither promotes nor denigrates any religious view, it will be acceptable. Since the display will not be open for a year, the atheists have filed a lawsuit prematurely. When the display opens, it will almost surely contain plenty of secular commemorations of 9/11. So Zautyk is correct on this point. Unfortunately, she does not seem to understand why she is right.

She proceeds to take issue with the following statement from AA's president: "The World Trade Center cross . . . has been blessed by so-called holy men and presented as a reminder that God, who couldn't be bothered to stop the Muslim terrorists or prevent 3,000 people from being killed in his name, cared only enough to bestow upon us some rubble that resembles a cross." Zautyk responds: "Don't know about you, but I feel sorry for a guy who think like that. I will say a prayer for him."

Yes, and I'm sure Mr. Silverman would be happy to think for you, Ms. Zautyk. She may not like his statement, but he makes a good point. It's not likely that a loving god would allow senseless deaths to occur but make sure a piece of rubble was left standing in the shape of a cross. Of course, people believe what they wish to believe, so they assume see the hand of God in a piece of debris. It is pretty silly if you think about it.

But the real kicker in Zautyk's editorial is her obnoxious conclusion: "Atheists don't believe in anything, so how to represent them at the 9/11 museum? Obviously, by absolutely NOTHING." That is an ignorant and bigoted remark. Atheists believe in the same things everyone else believes in. They have families and send their kids to school. Many of our greatest scientists are atheists.

Zautyk has made one of the snottiest, most ignorant, most obnoxious remarks ever to disgrace the editorial page of a "newspaper." A person who truly aspired to Christ's example would not make a remark like that. She has just insulted approximately one-sixth of the people in this country. Would her "newspaper" publish ignorant remarks like that if they were made against people in any other group? Shame on Karen Zautyk for making a remark like that, and shame on the Kearny Observer for publishing it.

Edited by KOTW
Content.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Kearny Observer doesn't cover local elections. When school board members walk out of session in a huff, that story gets covered three weeks later. This so-called newspaper's failures have made it a joke for years.

Now, to top off its bad coverage, we get an ******** ******** editor named Karen Zautyk. This week's editorial, titled "At cross purposes with nonbelievers," is a piece of vindictive screed against atheists. There's no point asking whether Zautyk sees her own biases; clearly, she does not. Let's just cover a few of the lowlights. (I'd post the text of her little opus but the Observer hasn't put it on line yet.)

She asks why an atheist group would post a billboard expressing its beliefs instead of spending the money feeding the hungry or some other act of charity. Of course, she has no problem at all with all the Christian billboards, nativity displays and advertising – not to mention the churches and cathedrals, some of which cost millions of dollars to build and maintain. So for starters, she is being a hypocrite.

Then she criticizes a group called American Atheists (AA) for filing a lawsuit challenging the 9/11 cross at the World Trade Center. The lawsuit isn't going to win. The case will be analyzed the same way nativity scene cases are, so that if the entire display neither promotes nor denigrates any religious view, it will be acceptable. Since the display will not be open for a year, the atheists have filed a lawsuit prematurely. When the display opens, it will almost surely contain plenty of secular commemorations of 9/11. So Zautyk is correct on this point. Unfortunately, she does not seem to understand why she is right.

She proceeds to take issue with the following statement from AA's president: "The World Trade Center cross . . . has been blessed by so-called holy men and presented as a reminder that God, who couldn't be bothered to stop the Muslim terrorists or prevent 3,000 people from being killed in his name, cared only enough to bestow upon us some rubble that resembles a cross." Zautyk responds: "Don't know about you, but I feel sorry for a guy who think like that. I will say a prayer for him."

Yes, and I'm sure Mr. Silverman would be happy to think for you, Ms. Zautyk. She may not like his statement, but he makes a good point. It's not likely that a loving god would allow senseless deaths to occur but make sure a piece of rubble was left standing in the shape of a cross. Of course, people believe what they wish to believe, so they assume see the hand of God in a piece of debris. It is pretty silly if you think about it.

But the real kicker in Zautyk's editorial is her obnoxious conclusion: "Atheists don't believe in anything, so how to represent them at the 9/11 museum? Obviously, by absolutely NOTHING." That is an ignorant and bigoted remark. Atheists believe in the same things everyone else believes in. They have families and send their kids to school. Many of our greatest scientists are atheists.

Zautyk has made one of the snottiest, most ignorant, most obnoxious remarks ever to disgrace the editorial page of a "newspaper." A person who truly aspired to Christ's example would not make a remark like that. She has just insulted approximately one-sixth of the people in this country. Would her "newspaper" publish ignorant remarks like that if they were made against people in any other group? Shame on Karen Zautyk for making a remark like that, and shame on the Kearny Observer for publishing it.

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Smitty

its the worst paper because it doesn't report any of the real stories. The other day I'm reading the observer and read about the two car jackings, but when you look at the dates they occurred it was like 3 weeks prior to the story being printed. What the hell is up with that?

There is never anything in the paper about what went on during the council meetings (which would help us who work nights) and do they not have one reporter who's job it is to call the local police departments to get daily jobs?

It is not the police departments job to call the newspaper to tell them what's going on, it's the newspapers job to investigate and report meaningful stories. Not to mention everyone loves reading the crime stuff to see who in town was arrested. It's a shame but its no secret what issues people want to read about. I get my information about my home town from nj.com because my local newspaper refuses to do any reporting. It's the same every week. Two main stories that nobody cares about, a bunch of advertising, and then high school sports scores.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Kearny Christian

The Kearny Observer doesn't cover local elections. When school board members walk out of session in a huff, that story gets covered three weeks later. This so-called newspaper's failures have made it a joke for years.

Now, to top off its bad coverage, we get an ******** ******** editor named Karen Zautyk. This week's editorial, titled "At cross purposes with nonbelievers," is a piece of vindictive screed against atheists. There's no point asking whether Zautyk sees her own biases; clearly, she does not. Let's just cover a few of the lowlights. (I'd post the text of her little opus but the Observer hasn't put it on line yet.)

She asks why an atheist group would post a billboard expressing its beliefs instead of spending the money feeding the hungry or some other act of charity. Of course, she has no problem at all with all the Christian billboards, nativity displays and advertising – not to mention the churches and cathedrals, some of which cost millions of dollars to build and maintain. So for starters, she is being a hypocrite.

Then she criticizes a group called American Atheists (AA) for filing a lawsuit challenging the 9/11 cross at the World Trade Center. The lawsuit isn't going to win. The case will be analyzed the same way nativity scene cases are, so that if the entire display neither promotes nor denigrates any religious view, it will be acceptable. Since the display will not be open for a year, the atheists have filed a lawsuit prematurely. When the display opens, it will almost surely contain plenty of secular commemorations of 9/11. So Zautyk is correct on this point. Unfortunately, she does not seem to understand why she is right.

She proceeds to take issue with the following statement from AA's president: "The World Trade Center cross . . . has been blessed by so-called holy men and presented as a reminder that God, who couldn't be bothered to stop the Muslim terrorists or prevent 3,000 people from being killed in his name, cared only enough to bestow upon us some rubble that resembles a cross." Zautyk responds: "Don't know about you, but I feel sorry for a guy who think like that. I will say a prayer for him."

Yes, and I'm sure Mr. Silverman would be happy to think for you, Ms. Zautyk. She may not like his statement, but he makes a good point. It's not likely that a loving god would allow senseless deaths to occur but make sure a piece of rubble was left standing in the shape of a cross. Of course, people believe what they wish to believe, so they assume see the hand of God in a piece of debris. It is pretty silly if you think about it.

But the real kicker in Zautyk's editorial is her obnoxious conclusion: "Atheists don't believe in anything, so how to represent them at the 9/11 museum? Obviously, by absolutely NOTHING." That is an ignorant and bigoted remark. Atheists believe in the same things everyone else believes in. They have families and send their kids to school. Many of our greatest scientists are atheists.

Zautyk has made one of the snottiest, most ignorant, most obnoxious remarks ever to disgrace the editorial page of a "newspaper." A person who truly aspired to Christ's example would not make a remark like that. She has just insulted approximately one-sixth of the people in this country. Would her "newspaper" publish ignorant remarks like that if they were made against people in any other group? Shame on Karen Zautyk for making a remark like that, and shame on the Kearny Observer for publishing it.

I applaud Ms.Zautyk for speaking her mind and not being intimidated by political correctness. Atheists are the most easily offended group I've ever seen. They sued California over a cross erected to honor our war dead in the Mohave desert (which they lost) and now they've sued over two steel beams that were pulled from the 9/11 debris that resemble a cross(they'll lose again).

Atheists are very angry people and I think it's because they don't have God in their lives. I'll pray for them that they someday see the light.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I applaud Ms.Zautyk for speaking her mind and not being intimidated by political correctness. Atheists are the most easily offended group I've ever seen. They sued California over a cross erected to honor our war dead in the Mohave desert (which they lost) and now they've sued over two steel beams that were pulled from the 9/11 debris that resemble a cross(they'll lose again).

Atheists are very angry people and I think it's because they don't have God in their lives. I'll pray for them that they someday see the light.

Please, do not pray for me.

Thank you.

-ko

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I applaud Ms.Zautyk for speaking her mind and not being intimidated by political correctness. Atheists are the most easily offended group I've ever seen. They sued California over a cross erected to honor our war dead in the Mohave desert (which they lost) and now they've sued over two steel beams that were pulled from the 9/11 debris that resemble a cross(they'll lose again).

Atheists are very angry people and I think it's because they don't have God in their lives. I'll pray for them that they someday see the light.

Yet again you are wrong, and as usual you are obnoxious about it.

The Supreme Court sent the Mohave desert cross case back to the lower court for further consideration. Among the people speaking out against the cross was Rev. Barry Lynn, a Christian pastor and head of Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

Earlier this year, the Ninth Federal Circuit Court ruled against the Mount Soledad cross in La Jolla, California. You should read the Court's opinion, not that you would have the brains to understand it or the objectivity to evaluate it honestly.

The lawsuit over the 9/11 debris is a dead-on loser. The display isn't even open yet, so the plaintiffs can't prove that they have been harmed or that the display crosses any Constitutional line. A few radical atheists have brought that lawsuit. Most atheists do not support it.

In arguing that all atheists are the same, you are being a complete jerk - as usual. Approximately one-sixth of the American people are atheists, approximately fifty million Americans. Our numbers have doubled in the past twenty years, making us the fastest growing religious viewpoint in the United States. Some notable atheists are Einstein, Stephen Hawking and George Orwell.

Across the world, atheism is commonplace. In Sweden, for example, 77% of the people do not believe in a god. The Swedes don't seem particularly angry to me. I can't think of the last time they invaded another country, for example.

It's very simple. You are an ignorant bigot who does not understand that the world is a big place with many kinds of people, most of whom are smarter than you are. You don't understand them - of course you wouldn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're going to pray for ko, please pray that he gets out of his parents basement soon.

I'll pray that you learn how to use possessive nouns.

And by the way, I live in my parents' attic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll pray that you learn how to use possessive nouns.

And by the way, I live in my parents' attic.

It's good to see that you've taken up prayer little ko. My guess is that you'll need it if you ever get into the real world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest dogretired

What about Harrison? At least there are a few crime reports regarding Kearny. Harrison? Nothing. Many moons ago there used to be a police blotter for every town. At least the South Bergenite reports for North Arlington, Lyndhurst, Rutherford etc. People want to know what is going on in their community. Does Harrison intimidate the Observer to withhold crime reports or is the paper afraid to ASK for them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...