Patterico's Pontifications

6/4/2020

NYT Times Staffers Upset Over Publication of Sen. Cotton’s Op-Ed (Update Added)

Filed under: General — Dana @ 1:06 pm



[guest post by Dana]

New York Times staffers objected to the media outlet publishing Sen. Tom Cotton’s op-ed yesterday. In the essay, Cotton called for a military response to protesters:

Here is what Trish Hall, the former Op-Ed and Sunday Review editor, has said about submitting an op-ed to the NYT at the paper’s How to submit an Op-Ed essay page here:

Anything can be an Op-Ed. Personal or explanatory essays, commentary on news events, reflections on cultural trends and more are all welcome. We’re interested in anything well-written with a fact-based viewpoint we believe readers will find worthwhile.

The Editorial page editor also responded to the outcry, and justified the decision to publish the essay. [Ed. The opening sentence comes as no surprise...]:

*It is not unusual for right-leaning opinion articles in The Times to attract criticism. This time, the outcry from readers, Times staff members and alumni of the paper was strong enough to draw an online defense of the essay’s publication from James Bennet, the editorial page editor.

“Times Opinion owes it to our readers to show them counter-arguments, particularly those made by people in a position to set policy,” Mr. Bennet wrote in a thread on Twitter. “We understand that many readers find Senator Cotton’s argument painful, even dangerous. We believe that is one reason it requires public scrutiny and debate.”

Don’t we want to know what our elected officials think? I certainly do! How else do we hold them accountable?

Certainly everyone has a right to voice their disapproval of anything in the NYT. But if staffers (and readers are so offended), then maybe sit down and put all of that thought and passion into writing a robust and persuasive rebuttal for publication. This is the beauty of an Op-Ed page. Protest Cotton’s essay all you want, but do not demand that the paper refuse to publish an “opinion” piece about which you strenuously disagree. If a publication claims to be committed to publishing “anything” that is well-written, then have at it. More speech is the correct answer, not less, and certainly not less because it offends you.

[Ed. Was there this same level of staff outrage when the New York Times ran an op-ed in February by Sirajuddin Haqqani, the deputy leader of the Taliban?]

Consider this a thread to also discuss the substance of Cotton’s essay linked above.

JVW pointed me to this thread by NYT op-ed writer Bari Weiss responding to the Cotton op-ed kerfuffle: full here. (Note: JVW disagreed with her last comment below, and responded to her on Twitter:

The civil war inside The New York Times between the (mostly young) wokes the (mostly 40+) liberals is the same one raging inside other publications and companies across the country. The dynamic is always the same.

The Old Guard lives by a set of principles we can broadly call civil libertarianism. They assumed they shared that worldview with the young people they hired who called themselves liberals and progressives. But it was an incorrect assumption.

The New Guard has a different worldview, one articulated best by @JonHaidt and @glukianoff. They call it “safetyism,” in which the right of people to feel emotionally and psychologically safe trumps what were previously considered core liberal values, like free speech.

Perhaps the cleanest example of this dynamic was in 2018, when David Remnick, under tremendous public pressure from his staffers, disinvited Steve Bannon from appearing on stage at the New Yorker Ideas Festival. But there are dozens and dozens of examples.

I’ve been mocked by many people over the past few years for writing about the campus culture wars. They told me it was a sideshow. But this was always why it mattered: The people who graduated from those campuses would rise to power inside key institutions and transform them.

I’m in no way surprised by what has now exploded into public view. In a way, it’s oddly comforting: I feel less alone and less crazy trying to explain the dynamic to people. What I am shocked by is the speed. I thought it would take a few years, not a few weeks.

Here’s one way to think about what’s at stake: The New York Times motto is “all the news that’s fit to print.” One group emphasizes the word “all.” The other, the word “fit.”

W/r/t Tom Cotton’s oped and the choice to run it: I agree with our critics that it’s a dodge to say “we want a totally open marketplace of ideas!” There are limits. Obviously. The question is: does his view fall outside those limits? Maybe the answer is yes.

If the answer is yes, it means that the view of more than half of Americans are unacceptable. And perhaps they are.

(Weiss then links to this: A plurality of Democrats would support calling in the U.S. military to aid police during protests, poll shows

UPDATE: The New York Times caves:

While I understand that the NYT makes necessary editorial decisions on a regular basis, readers deserve to know the standards that Cotton’s op-ed did not meet. Also, we need to know who was responsible for the alleged “rushed editorial process”. It’s a bit odd that, all of a sudden management decided that it was rushed. If management cannot provide these details, readers can only assume that they have caved to pressure from offended readers and staffers. This isn’t a good message for a major media outlet to send, especially after making the lofty assertion that the “Times Opinion owes it to our readers to show them counter-arguments, particularly those made by people in a position to set policy.” How foolish to back pedal, but how much more foolish to withhold op-eds by those wielding power in the nation. If we do not have access to their thoughts and arguments via an essay explaining in detail where they are at on a specific issue at any particular time, how are we to hold them accountable? How do we hold their feet to the fire, or demonstrate our support? If the Cotton essay hadn’t run, would it have run elsewhere? Would that outlet have the reach that the NYT does? Would we know in such detail, his view that we need for some kind of military intervention? Are Americans so deathly afraid of a countering view that one of the most powerful media outlets on the planet is deferring to them, and opting out of giving us the opportunity to judge for ourselves? If I can’t know the specifics of how Cotton’s essay did not meet already established standards, and judge for myself, I cannot give them the benefit of the doubt in this.

Further, expanding fact-checking can be a good move. But it is not good to curtail the number of opinion pieces because of fear of offending staffers and readers. It is not good to refrain from publishing pieces because they go against the politics of the majority of readers and staffers, who obviously skew left*. More speech, not less speech. Given the scope of reach of the NYT, it’s just a shame that they have chosen to limit what we can read, and what we can learn from those in positions of power. Of course they are free to do what they want with the publication. I just wish they would stick to a consistent message.

–Dana

2nd Update:

67 Responses to “NYT Times Staffers Upset Over Publication of Sen. Cotton’s Op-Ed (Update Added)”

  1. Hello.

    Dana (0feb77)

  2. What a bunch of whiny censorious clowns to bitch about an Op-Ed that they didn’t like. Good on the NYT for publishing Cotton’s horrible thoughts.

    Time123 (69b2fc)

  3. Remember, destroying property is not violence but expressing an opinion that hurts the feelings of the crybullies is violence.

    JVW (30a532)

  4. Ed. Was there this same level of staff outrage when the New York Times ran an op-ed in February by Sirajuddin Haqqani, the deputy leader of the Taliban?

    Sort of like when the President of Iran, who believes that gays and apostates should be put to death, is allowed to speak at an Ivy League university but a published scholar who has done controversial research into delicate racial topics is not.

    JVW (30a532)

  5. +1, JVW.

    Dana (0feb77)

  6. Sometimes the editor can just read the piece first and say “nah, don’t think so”. True with Cotton, doubly true for Haqqani.

    Was there this same level of staff outrage when the New York Times ran an op-ed in February by Sirajuddin Haqqani, the deputy leader of the Taliban?

    Remember, this was one of the guys that Trump had invited to Camp David, a visit that had to be scrapped because OF COURSE IT DID, it was monumentally stupid, still less stupid than the Trump/Cotton current argument though. And yes, there was quite a bit of push back for the Haqqani post. Including from their own editorial staff.

    Don’t want to overly spam the link limit.

    Cotton at least gets the benefit of not having backed the perpetrators of 9/11, and being responsible for killing hundreds of Americans since, so maybe he gets to offer a correction.

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (305827)

  7. If the NYT wants to publish Tom Cotton’s pretty shallow opinion, that’s their right. Freedom of the press.

    However, thus far, law enforcement has not had a good record of distinguishing protestors from looters (or has lied about their ability to do so), so maybe they shouldn’t ask the army to shoot them.

    Nic (896fdf)

  8. #3 —
    “‘Free speech’ = violence.”
    “Rioting = freedom speech.”
    “White silence = violence.”

    There are people who hold all those propositions.

    Radegunda (89f220)

  9. Shorter Cotton: “Let the floggings continue until morale improves!”

    Ben Franklin once testified to the British parliament concerning enforcement of the Stamp Act. In response to a question about whether “sending in the troops” would be a good idea, Franklin said:

    “They will not find a rebellion; they may indeed make one.”

    And we know how that turned out.

    Dave (1bb933)

  10. Thanks for the answers, Col. Klink.

    Dana (0feb77)

  11. I think the Op Ed is very newsworthy and I’m pleased to see it. Yes it’s terrible but people need to see that the GOP is putting some horrible ideas on the table. They are responding to the nation’s fear by stoking it, by pushing through it obnoxiously.

    As things stand, the GOP fully intends to run Trump as their candidate, as the leader of this party, again. It was bad enough in 2016 when we merely thought he would be half as bad as he is.

    Dustin (d59cff)

  12. @7-
    However, thus far, law enforcement has not had a good record of distinguishing protesters from looters…
    Or the press:

    Police Target Journalists as Trump Blames ‘Lamestream Media’ for Protests
    Many reporters, photographers and press advocates said the treatment of journalists by police officers in recent days reflected an erosion of trust in the news media that has seeped into law enforcement under President Trump, who has deemed critical coverage of his administration “fake news” and has frequently labeled some news organizations and journalists with variants of the phrase “enemies of the people.”
    …..
    In a sign that police officers would not follow the customary hands-off approach, Minnesota State Patrol officers arrested a CNN reporting team live on the air on Friday. That same day, a TV reporter in Louisville, Ky., was hit by a pepper ball by an officer who appeared to be aiming at her while she covered the protest on live television.
    ….
    On Sunday, Mr. Trump blamed the “Lamestream Media” for the protests in a tweet, calling journalists “truly bad people with a sick agenda.”
    …..

    US Law Enforcement Are Deliberately Targeting Journalists During George Floyd Protests Warning: Graphic images.

    ….[I]n the majority of the cases we have recorded the journalists are clearly identifiable as press, and it is clear that they are being deliberately targeted. This pattern of violence against journalists is replicated in several cities, but appears most intense in Minneapolis.
    …..
    This selection of incidents demonstrates that law enforcement across multiple cities, but especially in Minneapolis, are knowingly and deliberately targeting journalists with less lethal munitions, arrests and other forms of violence.

    This is a selection of the most egregious examples of violence against journalists. Many others can be seen in this thread by the author.
    …….

    Rip Murdock (80e6b4)

  13. Yes it’s terrible but people need to see that the GOP is putting some horrible ideas on the table. They are responding to the nation’s fear by stoking it, by pushing through it obnoxiously.

    It’s going to be some kind of election with one side stoking historical racial resentments and suggesting a horrible economic agenda and the other side stoking generational and racial fears and suggesting a horrible economic agenda.

    JVW (30a532)

  14. The NYT would not run an op-ed endorsing the joys of pedophilia, and I rather think those to my right would be up in arms if they had done so. They make choices, and by their own estimation, turn down thousands of offers a week. People are criticizing that editorial judgement call, and yes, I do find the notion of using the military against my neighbors just as vile.

    Attempts to claim this is some sort of call for censorship are errant nonsense. Putting aside the obvious (nobody is calling for congress to make a law), the NYT of course remains just as free as Breitbart to run this unAmerican crap as ever, and outside of a few nobodys, I see no call to shut them down (unlike cops who spent the week shooting media with rubber bullets…)

    I personally canceled my NYT sub late last year. I won’t do anything that brings them revenue. You of course get to make your own choices, but I refuse to support this sort of unamerican call for authoritarian white supremacy Cotton was pushing as his audition for the 2024 nomination.

    john (cd2753)

  15. It’s going to be some kind of election with one side stoking historical racial resentments and suggesting a horrible economic agenda and the other side stoking generational and racial fears and suggesting a horrible economic agenda.

    JVW (30a532) — 6/4/2020 @ 2:03 pm

    Indeed, President ‘they gonna put y’all back in chains’ is not going to cover himself in glory in the next few years. We have a pair of dumb trolls running for president. It feels like the sane are held hostage by the people who watch cable news all day.

    Dustin (d59cff)

  16. I’ve added commentary about the NYT/Cotton op-ed by Bari Weiss, a NYT opinion writer. H/T JVW.

    Dana (0feb77)

  17. 3 Ex-MPD Officers Involved In George Floyd’s Death Make First Court Appearance, Face $1 Mil. Bail
    Thomas Lane, J. Alexander Kueng, and Tou Thao appeared in a Hennepin County courtroom, where they were granted $1 million in bail, or $750,000 with conditions.

    They face aiding and abetting second-degree unintentional murder charges, as well as aiding and abetting second-degree manslaughter.

    During their appearance, they were also ordered not to work again in security or law enforcement, to surrender their gun, and never have any contact with the victim’s family.
    ……

    Rip Murdock (80e6b4)

  18. U.S. Park Police said they didn’t fire tear gas Monday, but tear gas cannisters were found at the scene
    Gas canisters collected by WUSA9 crews Monday night indicate that artificial CS tear gas was indeed used by federal law enforcement agents clearing out the protesters next to Lafayette Square.
    The canisters, newly analyzed by WUSA9, show that not only was natural OC gas used, as previously reported, but that artificial CS gas, or what is more commonly known as tear gas, was used as well. WUSA9 crews as well as eyewitnesses described a green smoke coming from the canisters. Immediate symptoms include burning, watery eyes, throat constriction and severe coughing.

    The US Park Police denied using CS or OC canisters to WUSA9 in a call Thursday morning.
    ……

    Rip Murdock (80e6b4)

  19. Rand Paul battles Kamala Harris and Cory Booker on anti-lynching bill
    The Senate’s foremost contrarian, Rand Paul, clashed with Kamala Harris and Cory Booker on the Senate floor Thursday over Paul’s opposition to a popular anti-lynching bill.

    The Senate could easily approve the House’s bill to make lynching a federal crime and send it to President Donald Trump for his signature. But the Kentucky Republican is demanding changes that he says are needed to ensure lynching charges can’t be brought for minor injuries.
    …..
    Paul presented a scenario in which, under the bill being considered, someone could be shoved to the floor in a bar and suffer minor injuries and be accused of lynching. He said that could lead to unfair incarcerations.
    ……

    Rip Murdock (80e6b4)

  20. Florida’s reopening met with record daily coronavirus cases
    Florida has reported a three-day run of increased coronavirus cases as it reopens its economy and jockeys to host the Republican National Convention.

    On Thursday, the Florida Department of Health reported 1,419 new coronavirus cases, the biggest single-day increase in cases since the state began reporting daily figures in March and a 2 percent increase in total cases, bringing the state’s total to 60,183.

    The previous highest reporting day was April 17, when the state reported 1,413 new cases, a 6 percent increase at the time.

    On Wednesday, the department reported 1,317 additional cases, which had been the biggest one-day increase since the April 17 previous high.

    More than 1,000 infections have been reported daily since Tuesday. Prior to that, reported infections last exceeded 1,000 on May 28 and, before that, May 20, according to the Florida Department of Health.

    “The cases today represent what occurred about two weeks ago,” Jill Roberts, of the University of South Florida College of Public Health, told POLITICO. “Memorial Day weekends is likely to blame for the increase in cases, both due to relaxation of social distancing measures and the holiday resulting in more people moving about.”
    …..
    DeSantis is pushing to woo the Republican National Convention from North Carolina, an event that would bring thousands of party loyalists to the state and would likely be its first mass gathering since the pandemic began.
    …..
    Entirely predictable.

    Rip Murdock (80e6b4)

  21. But what are your thoughts about the post, Rip Murdock? I’d like to know that.

    Dana (0feb77)

  22. Senator Cotton didn’t say anything that Colin Powell is reputed to have said, or come close to saying, and maybe Eisenhower.

    It’s that when you have a conflict, you shouldn’t bring just enough force to win, but enough so that there is no doubt who will win, and that way, you’ll have the least amount of casualties – on both sides.

    Sammy Finkelman (da1ea7)

  23. It’s that when you have a conflict, you shouldn’t bring just enough force to win, but enough so that there is no doubt who will win, and that way, you’ll have the least amount of casualties – on both sides.

    There is no effing war. These are American citizens, 99% are peaceful exercising their 1st amendment rights. Who are you using force against, why, what are you winning?

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (305827)

  24. Colonel Klink (Ret) (305827) — 6/4/2020 @ 4:12 pm

    There is no effing war. These are American citizens, 99% are peaceful exercising their 1st amendment rights. Who are you using force against, why, what are you winning?

    There is alotof attention paid to the looters and attackers. The protesters or the mourners aren’t a problem, except for possibly spreading the coronavirus (they’re ignoring this more than the anti-lockdown protesters did) Now it is outdoors, and there are als not too many people infected.

    There are three populations:

    1) The run of the mill protesters, who cnan be subdivided into several different categories probably

    2) The Antifa-like attackers of the police etc (mostly from out of town) who may be in it for the mayhem – and maybe money.

    3) The organized looters (while the warehouse that takes the stolen goods, probably for resale to 99 cent stores, is probably out of town, most of the actual looters are from the cities where they lot, although not necessarily the same part of the city.

    The looters are divided into two groups: Lookouts and scouts, sometimes on bicycles; and actual looters, who may be divided into two categories: Those who break and enter, and those who facilitate escape, and transportation of the stolen goods.

    The New York Post was told that they had stolen U-hauls with out of state license plates, but actually that was on;y incident – mostly they use cars, sometimes luxury cars. Uber cars were used fr the looters themselves.

    This is more organized than Ocean’s Eleven, and on a vast, nationwide scale. I think they are the same people who fenced TIDE detergent powder.

    I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that the whole protest movement was in many ways ginned up by them.

    Sammy Finkelman (981277)

  25. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/03/why-are-criminals-stealing-tide-detergent-and-using-it-for-money/254631/

    There are three ways the merchandise tends to get sold off. Fencers can (1) sell the goods at pawn shops or flea markets, (2) return it to the store for a refund, or (3) set up shop on a website like eBay. In recent years, the online auction house has actually been working with law enforcement and retailers to try and clamp down on criminal activity.

    That was in 2012.

    Sammy Finkelman (981277)

  26. So you want to use the 82nd Airborne on some vandals and petty thieves, again, who are American citizens in the US. Plus, the 82nd Airborne doesn’t even have the authority to issue a Jaywalking ticket.

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (305827)

  27. There are three ways the merchandise tends to get sold off. Fencers can (1) sell the goods at pawn shops or flea markets, (2) return it to the store for a refund, or (3) set up shop on a website like eBay. In recent years, the online auction house has actually been working with law enforcement and retailers to try and clamp down on criminal activity.

    OK, and so what? An Apache helicopter isn’t the solution to petty crime.

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (305827)

  28. Meanwhile, in the City of Brotherly Love, Di Bruno Bros. offered police officers free lunches, but revoked that after the employees objected. And now the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 5 president John Nesby has stated that officers will boycott the eatery.

    The Dana in Kentucky (6a5316)

  29. https://mobile.twitter.com/marcatracy/status/1268667488356704256

    Mea culpa. Mea culpa. Never let a conservative have a voice unless he’s bashing a Republican.

    NJRob (b91717)

  30. 26. Colonel Klink (Ret) (305827) — 6/4/2020 @ 4:40 pm

    So you want to use the 82nd Airborne on some vandals and petty thieves, again, who are American citizens in the US. Plus, the 82nd Airborne doesn’t even have the authority to issue a Jaywalking ticket.

    No, of course not. that’s crazy. Trump said the army because doesn’t really have any authrity over that.

    He did use the Air Force in Washington, by he way. Had a helicopter (a Medivac helicopter, but a helicopter is a helicopter and makes lots of noise) fly over some protesters. Or maybe that was people making his orders more reasonable. Maybe somebody would be injured.

    Sammy Finkelman (981277)

  31. Didn’t they already use that mea culpa in court with the libel against Sarah Palin?

    nk (1d9030)

  32. Mea culpa. Mea culpa. Never let a conservative have a voice unless he’s bashing a Republican.

    Like the way Trump has so often done?

    Radegunda (89f220)

  33. … supposing just for the sake of argument that Trump is an actual conservative. Point is: Trump defenders have been quite happy to join in the attack whenever Trump bashes a Republican.

    Radegunda (89f220)

  34. The NYT has caved, and apologized for running the Cotton op-ed. See update to post.

    Dana (0feb77)

  35. John wrote:

    The NYT would not run an op-ed endorsing the joys of pedophilia, and I rather think those to my right would be up in arms if they had done so. They make choices, and by their own estimation, turn down thousands of offers a week. People are criticizing that editorial judgement call, and yes, I do find the notion of using the military against my neighbors just as vile.

    I would like to think that those to your left would also be up in arms, but, sadly, there have been a few supposedly learned articles claiming that sexual interest in children is just another preference, and that we should have more sympathy and understanding for pedophiles.

    However, when you say that you “find the notion of using the military against my neighbors just as vile,” you should note that the National Guard is a form of the military. Technically, the commander-in-chief of a state’s National Guard troops and detachments is the Governor, not President Trump — unless he mobilizes them, anyway — and National Guard troops go through the same Basic Combat Training as regular Army and Army Reserve troops, in integrated units.

    Everybody was up in arms when President Trump opened his mouth about possibly using the Army to put down the riots, something he hasn’t yet done, but several state Governors were, in effect, already doing that.

    The Dana in Kentucky (6a5316)

  36. Technically, the National Guard is a citizens’ militia. The opposite of a national army, and more like a sheriff’s posse than the 101st Airborne.

    nk (1d9030)

  37. The much better liked Dana wrote:

    The NYT has caved, and apologized for running the Cotton op-ed.

    On June 2nd, The Philadelphia Inquirer ran an article “Buildings Matter, Too.” And then they caved, too, tweeting:

    A headline published in Tuesday’s Inquirer was offensive, inappropriate and we should not have printed it. We deeply regret that we did. We also know that an apology on its own is not sufficient.

    We need to do better. We’ve heard that loud and clear, including from our own staff. We will. A detailed explanation of how we got this so wrong will follow later today.

    The upper-middle class left think that they can appease the radicals and be their allies, but if the revolution ever comes, they’ll be among the first ones lined up against the wall.

    The Dana in Kentucky (6a5316)

  38. The retired Commandant of Stalag 13 wrote:

    There is no effing war. These are American citizens, 99% are peaceful exercising their 1st amendment rights. Who are you using force against, why, what are you winning?

    This is like the claim that 99% of the Palestinians just want peace, but the Palestinian population hides, supports and enables the relatively few who are actually Hamas fighters. One might argue that it’s only the first couple of guys who smash windows and loot stores, but they still get a mob started that goes right along with the fun.

    The Dana in Kentucky (6a5316)

  39. Our Windy City barrister wrote:

    Technically, the National Guard is a citizens’ militia. The opposite of a national army, and more like a sheriff’s posse than the 101st Airborne.

    Given that many National Guard units were called up and sent to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan, I’d say that they weren’t all that much like a sheriff’s posse.

    The Dana in Kentucky (6a5316)

  40. Mr Murdock:

    Senator Paul is partially right about the virtue signaling anti-lynching bill. He’s just trying to slow it down, but the truth is that it is simply something meaningless: lynching is already illegal in every state in the union.

    IIRC, only four Republicans had the cojones to vote against it in the House, among them one of my favorite congressmen, libertarian Republican Thomas Massie (KY 4th District).

    The Dana in Kentucky (6a5316)

  41. You did say “technically”. And you have been to known to mention the Constitution on occasion. The fact that the National Guard can be called up as a ready-made base of conscripts, like the Reserves, and placed under the command of the President, in time of war, does not change their Constitutional and historical role in their respective states.

    nk (1d9030)

  42. This is like the claim that 99% of the Palestinians just want peace, but the Palestinian population hides, supports and enables the relatively few who are actually Hamas fighters. One might argue that it’s only the first couple of guys who smash windows and loot stores, but they still get a mob started that goes right along with the fun.

    I know you’re not arguing this because you said, “one might” argue that. Of course one would be a complete moron, an idiot that doesn’t understand what America is, and the difference between it and and active war zone. I mean just a complete and total idiot.

    It’s a good thing that you aren’t arguing that though.

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (305827)

  43. Cotton’s comparison to the Rodney King riots seems disingenuous.

    In that case, there was intensive rioting confined to relatively limited regions of one city which continued unabated for days. Deploying the National Guard in that situation, if the local police are overwhelmed, is defensible.

    In this situation, the rioting has been spread over many cities, but has been sporadic. Playing whack-a-mole by sending military forces to a dozen or more cities where there is no sustained unrest is far more likely to inflame the situation than to improve security. To the extent rioting continues, the rioters could just go somewhere the troops aren’t.

    What Cotton is really proposing is using the military for pure political theater – like the St.Johns Church photo-op, on a much more grandiose and alarming scale – to help salvage Trump’s image.

    Dave (1bb933)

  44. What a great post. My question:

    Why does the NYT have such great power, given that’s just one newspaper and IS one-sided? Why do Conservatives and Republicans worship it, since it stands against almost everything they believe almost never gives either Conservatives OR the Republicans a fair shake?

    And of course, if you’ve ever read Maureen Dowd, Michelle Goldberg, or Charles Blow (to name 3) the idea that the NYT Op-ed page has some lofty standard that Sen. Cotton didn’t meet is hysterically funny.

    rcocean (fcc23e)

  45. And one more point. The Left can hide its desire to censor, gatekeep, and dominate behind “Safetyism” or “Protecting the most vulnerable” or “Fighting Hate”, but I don’t see why the Center-right should agree to grant them any sincerity.

    The Left merely wants to de-platform those it dislikes and screeching how someone’s speech “offends” Or “Makes you feel unsafe” is just a BS way to do it. If we’re going to let the Left engage in this nonsense, then the Right should start asserting that any anti-religious, anti-white, anti-business, anti-white comments make THEM feel unsafe and demand the LEFT be censored.

    rcocean (fcc23e)

  46. BTW, you would think the readers of the NYT’s would welcome Cotton’s opinion as a relief from the non-stop, daily, never ending attacks on Trump and Republicans and support for the Democrats. Instead, the NYT readers like their echo chamber and don’t want to hear anyone differ from the party line on any issue. Just give them the same ol’, same ol, every day. Diversity of thought is unwelcome.

    rcocean (fcc23e)

  47. Why did Tom “I Wish I Was In The Land Of” Cotton publish in the NYT?

    nk (1d9030)

  48. @47 The Little Rock Democrat-Gazette has the word Democrat in it and he’s afraid he’d get cooties. Also, very few people read it.

    Nic (896fdf)

  49. > Technically, the commander-in-chief

    That’s nice. Technically, I’m not going to play chase the irrelevance with you. Trump has been pretty (unusually so, for him) clear about what he’s talking about, and I think I was, too. If you have a substantive issue with what I wrote, please share.

    john (cd2753)

  50. NYTimes writer Bari Weiss was actually willing to brave the woke-mobs:

    Bari Weiss✔
    @bariweiss

    The civil war inside The New York Times between the (mostly young) wokes the (mostly 40+) liberals is the same one raging inside other publications and companies across the country. The dynamic is always the same……

    …. The Old Guard lives by a set of principles we can broadly call civil libertarianism. They assumed they shared that worldview with the young people they hired who called themselves liberals and progressives. But it was an incorrect assumption…..

    …..The New Guard has a different worldview, one articulated best by @JonHaidt and @glukianoff. They call it “safetyism,” in which the right of people to feel emotionally and psychologically safe trumps what were previously considered core liberal values, like free speech…….

    ….. I’m in no way surprised by what has now exploded into public view. In a way, it’s oddly comforting: I feel less alone and less crazy trying to explain the dynamic to people. What I am shocked by is the speed. I thought it would take a few years, not a few weeks……

    …. Here’s one way to think about what’s at stake: The New York Times motto is “all the news that’s fit to print.” One group emphasizes the word “all.” The other, the word “fit.”
    __ _

    The Editor-At-Large at The Daily Beast shared the new style (and prose) of liberal thought in a short (and now deleted) tweet:

    Why she still got her teeth?

    Source: Instapundit
    __ _

    Cotton expressed a view shared by a majority of Americans, even over 40% of Hillary voters.

    That the new mobsters can’t even articulate rebuttal but demand censorship is a huge tell on their ability to tell the truth.

    I don’t have much pity for the 40ish liberals at the Times, they have aided and abetted the takeover by radicals since the Obama admin. Now we have this junior vengeance mob seeking to ride Joe Biden‘s coattails into the White House and beyond.

    Wake up.
    __ _

    harkin (9c4571)

  51. Anybody who thinks Cotton is recommending troops to stop the mayhem and restore order (you know, one of the primary functions of government) purely as ‘political theatre’ either hasn’t watched the news in a week or just doesn’t want to see reality.
    _

    harkin (9c4571)

  52. Apparently the Times believes speech is violence and looting/arson/assault/destruction is speech.
    _

    harkin (9c4571)

  53. Apparently the Times believes speech is violence and looting/arson/assault/destruction is speech.

    Where did they say that?

    I’m sure that as a devoted servant of the truth, unlike those dishonest media types, you wouldn’t just make up something like that…right?

    Dave (1bb933)

  54. Wait till you hear about the WaPo and cop TV and Movies.
    _

    harkin (9c4571)

  55. You realize this is Mao’s revolution happening in America, right?

    And you’re letting it happen because… Orange Man Bad.

    NJRob (4d595c)

  56. You realize this is Mao’s revolution happening in America, right?

    And you’re letting it happen because… Orange Man Bad.

    You understand that the orange is in charge right.

    Or is he just too much of a cuck to actually have any say. And you’re for him because you like weak willed, lilly livered cowards who are leading the country into a Communist dictatorship?

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (305827)

  57. @55 Have you read about China before the communist revolution and how awful their leadership had been to cause it? If you think that Trump has been terrible enough to cause that kind of revolution and you are still willing to vote for him, then you have an interesting reasoning process.

    Nic (896fdf)

  58. Dave (1bb933) — 6/4/2020 @ 8:52 pm

    My PSA for the day; here is what apparently means.

    ap·par·ent·ly
    /əˈperəntlē/
    adverb
    as far as one knows or can see.

    Used in a sentence; apparently, as far as harkin knows or can see the Times believes…

    It is synonymous with seemingly.

    frosty (f27e97)

  59. Colonel Klink (Ret) (305827) — 6/4/2020 @ 4:43 pm

    OK, and so what? An Apache helicopter isn’t the solution to petty crime.

    Of course not, although this wasn’t so petty, and it was quite planned.

    I didn’t say Cotton was right. Saying that the Insurrection Act should b invoked because “local law enforcement in some cities desperately needs backup,” and “delusional politicians” in other cities refuse to do what’s necessary and some Gvernors have not mobilized the National Guard, and in some cases the rioters still outnumber the police and Guard combined. (not true – the rioters are relatively few compared to the size of the crowds)

    I said he wasn’t saying anything very remarkable because all he was saying really was that they needed an “overwhelming show of force” in order to disperse, detain and ultimately deter lawbreakers.

    There actually may be a few other ways: You can find and arrest and charge the chief conspirators, or you can deter them by fear of a massive federal investigation. Just like the rioters in Los Angeles were deterred from breaking into synagogues, although they put graffiti on the outsides of synagogues and Jewish schools. Some synagogues took away and hid their Torah scrolls, which not only have high sanctity but are very valuable although difficult to fence.

    But the next day, Sunday, the riot planners had the crowd go into different neighborhoods, not Fairfax, Beverly-La Brea and Hancock Park, but places like Santa Monica and Long Beach, because they knew that, while graffiti would be pooh-poohed, any damage to a synagogue would be considered a hate crime and wouldn’t be forgotten, and the heat could destroy everything they were doing, and maybe they couldn’t entirely control what their foot soldiers would do.

    Also because there had been massive police and national guard presence on Saturday night. (it took several hours for that to happen) And also, in line with broken windows philosophy, as many signs of mayhem as possible were removed like at “The Grove. Stores were apparently not broken into there – in another place several were, but basically the whole thing was nipped in the bud. And a fund was setup to assist the half dozen stores that were damaged on Saturday.

    .

    Sammy Finkelman (ce04e1)

  60. I also said that Trump said something about using the military because it’s the only thing he has, and when all you have in a hammer everything looks like a nail.

    Actually it is almost the only thing he has.

    The Department of Justice is working on this.

    https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/ag-barr-evidence-antifa-foreign-actors-involved-sowing/story?id=71066996

    Attorney General William Barr said Thursday that the the federal government has evidence that the radical left-wing antifa movement as well as other extremist groups have “hijacked” legitimate protests around the country to incite violence, and said certain “foreign actors” are seizing on the unrest to sow discord in the U.S….

    on Wednesday the DOJ announced the arrest of three men connected to the far-right ‘Boogaloo’ movement who were allegedly plotting to incite violence at protests in Las Vegas.

    Asked by ABC News’ Senior Justice Correspondent Pierre Thomas why he didn’t name-check those arrests, Barr pointed to his opening statement where he acknowledged “actors of a variety of different political persuasions” who were also carrying out violence.

    “There are some groups that don’t have a particular ideology, other than anarchy and there’s some groups that want to bring about a civil war — the ‘Boogaloo’ group that has been on the margin of this as well trying to exacerbate the violence,” Barr said. “So we are dealing with as I say a witch’s brew of a lot of different extremist organizations.”

    Barr also cautioned that investigators are seeing “a lot of disinformation out there” with certain groups posing as members of other opposing groups.

    I think some of these groups may be totally phony groups. And virtually none of that is motivated by ideology, or the ideology is just a cover for the profit motive.

    Sammy Finkelman (ce04e1)

  61. all of a sudden management decided that it was rushed.

    Of course it was rushed, because they wanted something timely and they wanted something from a supporter of president Trump. And it was moderate.

    Sammy Finkelman (ce04e1)

  62. rocean asked:

    Why does the NYT have such great power, given that’s just one newspaper and IS one-sided? Why do Conservatives and Republicans worship it, since it stands against almost everything they believe almost never gives either Conservatives OR the Republicans a fair shake?

    It is the second largest circulation daily in the country, behind, if you can believe it, USA Today.

    On my poor site, I like to cite CNN over Fox, The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Wall Street Journal, because doing so eliminates complaints that, ‘Oh, you’re just citing some reich-wing whacko site.’

    And I am pimping my own The liberal media cave to the demands of the ‘woke’. :)

    The Dana in Kentucky (6a5316)

  63. RE: anti-lynching bill.

    That was the kind of thing that they tried t pass when they couldn’t get any othr kind of civil rights legislation passed.

    When the Civil Rights bill of 1964 was passed they dropped that. And it includes that. Several killers were prosecuted under that.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murders_of_Chaney,_Goodman,_and_Schwerner

    In 1967, after the state government refused to prosecute, the United States federal government charged eighteen individuals with civil rights violations. Seven were convicted and received relatively minor sentences for their actions. Outrage over the activists’ disappearances helped gain passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.[5]

    Now maybe you can amend it slightly. The maximum sentence is probably too low. (ten years)

    Sammy Finkelman (ce04e1)

  64. Yashar Ali 🐘✔
    @yashar
    The New York Times confirms that the editor of its editorial page @JBennet did not read the Tom Cotton op-ed before it was published

    To not review an op-ed written by a US Senator at a time of heightened tensions (or any other time) is malpractice.https://www.nytimes.com

    __ _

    Cotton issued a statement:

    Paul Farhi
    @farhip

    Statement from Sen. Cotton’s press sec’y about @nytimes saying his column “did not meet our standards:” “We weren’t contacted by the NewYork Times in advance of this statement…We’re curious to know what part of [the editorial] process and this piece didnt meet their standards.”
    __ _

    So far apparently the Times is stonewalling on a response. I guess they didn’t get the memo that a statement by a US senator which reflects the views of over half the citizens is not up to the standards of the NYTimes.

    This is a high school newspaper.
    _

    The scrambling continues. They are terrified of being targeted by the woke mob.

    DaddyCrushalot
    @daddycrushalot
    ·
    “No one read it beforehand…”

    “Senior people didn’t read it beforehand…”

    “Not enough senior people read it beforehand…”
    _

    harkin (9c4571)

  65. I’ve added another update from the NYT explaining where Cotton’s essay failed to meet their editorial standards.

    Dana (0feb77)

  66. So, the NY Times believes that there are limits to the freedom of the press. Good to know.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  67. Contest: Find the most offensive NY Times op-ed column. Here’s one:

    Stacking the Court [in favor]

    WHEN a majority of Supreme Court justices adopt a manifestly ideological agenda, it plunges the court into the vortex of American politics. If the Roberts court has entered voluntarily what Justice Felix Frankfurter once called the “political thicket,” it may require a political solution to set it straight….

    But the method most frequently employed to bring the court to heel has been increasing or decreasing its membership. The size of the Supreme Court is not fixed by the Constitution. It is determined by Congress.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3105 secs.