NY Times Opinion Editor Resigns After Internal Fury Over Op-ed by Senator Tom Cotton
Internal purge, diverse opinion not permitted.
Earlier this week, Stacey covered the New York Times op-ed “scandal” in which a prominent Republican senator published an op-ed about President Trump considering invocation of the Insurrection Act, a perfectly reasonable response to the wide-spread rioting, looting, arson, and murder our nation has endured for ten or more days.
So reasonable, in fact, that numerous presidents from progressive Woodrow Wilson to Democrats Lyndon Johnson and John Kennedy to Republicans Dwight D. Eisenhower and George H. W. Bush have all mobilized the military to deal with unruly, dangerous mobs.
The fall-out Stacey details has now resulted in the resignation of the Times‘ editorial page editor.
James Bennet, the editorial page editor of The New York Times, has resigned after a controversy over an Op-Ed by Senator Tom Cotton that called for military force against protesters in American cities https://t.co/Tt6PwmowZv
— The New York Times (@nytimes) June 7, 2020
The New York Times‘ tweet, of course, gets the whole point of Cotton’s piece entirely wrong.
This is false and offensive.
I called for using military force as a backup—only if police are overwhelmed—to stop riots, not to be used against protesters.
If @nytimes has any decency left, they should retract this smear. https://t.co/9qJLgWSwlP
— Tom Cotton (@TomCottonAR) June 7, 2020
The New York Times announced Sunday that Editorial Page Editor James Bennet is resigning — amid reports of anger inside the company over the publication of an op-ed from Sen. Tom Cotton about the George Floyd unrest last week.
Bennet, the brother of 2020 White House candidate Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., had apologized late last week after previously defending the piece, titled, “Send in the Troops.” Cotton, R-Ark., called for the government to deploy troops as a last resort to help quell riots and looting that emerged amid the anger over Floyd’s death in Minneapolis police custody last month.
The publication sparked a revolt among Times journalists, with some saying it endangered black employees. Some staff members called out sick Thursday in protest, and the Times later announced that a review found the piece did not meet its standards.
This resignation is so absurd that I really don’t know what they are thinking at the former gold standard of print journalism. The lunatics are running the asylum . . . right into the “woke” ground.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1269733556865118211?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Jesus
It’s so over the top everyday in every way …
Sieg Heil ,
iammix Bell
@iammix24
Replying to
@Breaking911
Blue cities are Chi-com run!
Conservatives protested peacefully but were branded as racists, while BLM, Antifa roam around looting, setting fires and planting bombs all over various cities. LIBERALS are a danger to society.Follow me as we expose MSM!
Never stand in the way of karma. The liberal Bible will now be purged of any wrong think.
I feel bad about this like I feel bad whenever Kim Jong Un executes one of his generals.
The left is pure Darwinism. All of them live the life of savages. Biggest bullies rise to the top and force you to comply. Refuse? You are steamrolled.
.
“This resignation is so absurd that I really don’t know what they are thinking…”
Fuzzy, you DARE to presume anyone at NYT is actually THINKING?
Боже мой!
What is boxe mon? I am ignorant and unwashed, and not one of he cool kids, so I’m asking. Thanks.
Oh My God
Copy, paste and inserted into search engine gives us this:
What does “боже мой” (bozhe moy) mean in Russian?
English words for боже мой include My goodness!, My god!, Oh my god!, Gracious me!, Crikey!, O my!, Man alive!, Heavens!, O dear me! and Goodness gracious!. Find more Russian words at wordhippo.com!
Боже мой! (2019) смотреть
The Soviet constitution, along with the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), were used by the EU in drafting the various documents creating the EU monstrosity. The Soviet constitution allowed for free speech.
And if you give these docs a read it all sounds so good. Rights to property, speech, religion, and more. But Rule 1 in statutory construction is to read the whole document. Every one of these docs, every one, plays the “by law” trick.
The “rights” are given, but only provisionally.
Take Article 29 of the UDHR,
“(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.”
Do you see the “by law” trick?
Government gives, then takes away.
Contrast this with our First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law abridging . . .” The reason for the contrast is that Americanism is based on the understanding that rights come from God and government is instituted to protect those rights. The opposite is that government gives rights, and can withhold them.
It’s either the American way or the UN/EU/USSR/PRC/Islam way.
Very nice.
As is being demonstrated every day it seems, the left WILL NOT allow free speech. Drew Brees rues the day he opened his mouth. It’s so bad that he’s letting his wife defend him. No matter, after the entire league starts kneeling for the National Anthem the National Felons League will lose the fans that have come back after their last debacle.
It’s true. 1936 Soviet Constitution, Article 125,
In conformity with the interests of the working people, and in order to strengthen the socialist system, the citizens of the U.S.S.R. are guaranteed by law:
a. freedom of speech
b. freedom of the press
c. freedom of assembly, including the holding of mass
d. freedom of street processions and demonstrations
These civil rights are ensured by placing at the disposal of the working people and their organizations printing presses, stocks of paper, public buildings, the streets, communications facilities and other material requisites for the exercise of these rights.
—–
That phrase “by law” means nothing since laws can be changed. Our rights to speech, assembly, press cannot be changed “by law;” they can only be changed by a change to the Constitution itself.
According to the Founders, government was to be a negative force which leaves people alone. Its sole function is to protect citizens from one another, and from foreign governments, and especially from their own government itself. The Founders did not create a government to be a positive force, to do things for people, to take from some to give to others. They understood that when government starts do something for one citizen it has to take from another to do so, and in the process it gains control over both.
With the collapse of the USSR, Russian courts declared the Communist party criminal….that the Party overruled law. One set for prols and one for the Party.
Just look at that smug Senator Tom Cotton, he’s eating this up, he loves it. He threw a wrench into the ideological cesspool that is the New York Times and wrecked them. Excellent work.
Good job, Tom!
Mobs rule the streets. Mobs rule the halls of government. And, now mobs rule the bastions of a free press. So, far, these mobs are confined to pone side of the ideological spectrum. What happens when mobs from the other side of the spectrum make their voices heard? Will any be able to hear the discussion over the roar of the guns?
Saw this posted on the The Conservative Tree house:
Firing Line with William F. Buckley Jr.: Mobilizing the Poor to overthrow the middle class – Saul Alinsky!
We can take this lightly anymore. They are on full attack.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsfxnaFaHWI
sorry can’t not can!
It seems as though a Stalinist clique is running the NYT. Anyone who says anything that deviates from the party line is quickly destroyed.
It would be funny if the Times employed Stalin’s pre-Photoshop image manipulation tactic — in which purged/executed Soviet apparatchiks were erased from photographs — by excising Cotton from all images in which he is present.
Merely the latest manifestation of infantile, narcissistic Dhimmi-crats’ increasingly unabashed and gleeful totalitarianism. Nothing to see here, folks — move right along.
They will begin burning books, next. Wait for it.
And the editor of a Philly paper was out the door because of a headline “Buildings Matter”. The children in the newsroom, and thus the Publisher (she said it was an offensive headline IIRC), demanded he begone and, just like Patrick What’shismame (you know, the bald Kirk), the Publisher made it so.
Abortion… cancel culture is a progressive condition.