by Ace
They’re not just anti-cop — they’re affirmatively pro-riot.
But only for their own riots, of course. Those J6ers are insurrectionists who should be imprisoned for years before trial, and then sentenced to 20 years after a quickie show trial.
Tom Cotton wrote an op-ed for the New York Times, suggesting that the National Guard be sent to quell the riots and arsons of the “Summer of Love.”
This was hardly a novel suggestion — it had been done before. The National Guard quelled the Rodney King riots, for example. Indeed, they were also called back to Los Angeles to quell the Black Lives Matter riots.
But the NYT’s DEI mascot Mara Gay shrieked that even suggesting this harmed black people, the only people whose safety matters:
Running this puts black people in danger. And other Americans standing up for our humanity and democracy, too. @nytimes pic.twitter.com/MQAA2WJ6YG
— Mara Gay (@MaraGay) June 4, 2020
All of the wokies and DEI hires rose up and demanded that not one but two people be fired — for the crime of editing an op-ed written by a sitting senator!
On June 3, 2020, The New York Times published Cotton’s piece, titled “Send in the Troops,” which made an argument in favor of the president deploying the military to quell the George Floyd riots that sparked havoc in cities across the country.What followed was an unprecedented backlash from within the paper. Dozens of Times employees rushed to social media in a coordinated campaign, many of them echoing the phrase “Running this put Black @nytimes staff in danger.”
Days later, the Times updated Cotton’s piece with a lengthy editor’s note declaring it “fell short of our standards and should not have been published.” Times publisher A.G. Sulzberger, who initially defended the op-ed’s publication, later reversed himself, blaming “a rushed editorial process.” Two members of the Times Opinion staff, James Bennet and Adam Rubenstein, were pushed out at the Times as a result. Another staffer, James Dao, was reassigned to a different department.
DePauw University journalism professor Jeffrey McCall said the episode shows the Times “has a real problem with groupthink” and that the paper is “more interested in journalistic wokeness than traditional reporting and commentating.”
…
Bari Weiss, who had served as the opinion staff editor for the Times, cited the incident in her stunning resignation letter submitted to Sulzberger weeks after the op-ed debacle.
“Twitter is not on the masthead of The New York Times. But Twitter has become its ultimate editor,” Weiss wrote at the time. “Op-eds that would have easily been published just two years ago would now get an editor or a writer in serious trouble, if not fired. If a piece is perceived as likely to inspire backlash internally or on social media, the editor or writer avoids pitching it. If she feels strongly enough to suggest it, she is quickly steered to safer ground. And if, every now and then, she succeeds in getting a piece published that does not explicitly promote progressive causes, it happens only after every line is carefully massaged, negotiated and caveated. It took the paper two days and two jobs to say that the Tom Cotton op-ed ‘fell short of our standards.'”
Bennet, the opinion page editor who had been at the Times for 19 years, first broke his silence in October 2022 expressing his bitterness towards Sulzberger, who he said did not have his back, saying to Semafor “he set me on fire and threw me in the garbage.”
“My regret is that editor’s note. My mistake there was trying to mollify people,” Bennet told Semafor.
Fast-forward to December 2023, Bennet authored a stunning essay in The Economist about how the Times “lost its way,” recalling the apology he was forced to give on a company-wide Zoom meeting with a “couple thousand people.”
That’s what Kathleen Kennedy demanded of Gina Carano. And it would have had the same effect — none. She still would have been fired after her ritual humiliation, just as Bennet was.
“The plan had been for the newsroom to talk about its coverage of the protests. Now the only subject was going to be the op-ed. Early that morning, I got an email from Sam Dolnick, a Sulzberger cousin and a top editor at the paper, who said he felt ‘we’ — he could have only meant me — owed the whole staff ‘an apology for appearing to place an abstract idea like open debate over the value of our colleagues’ lives, and their safety.’ He was worried that I and my colleagues had unintentionally sent a message to other people at the Times that: ‘We don’t care about their full humanity and their security as much as we care about our ideas,'” Bennet wrote, noting that he was contacted by a Sulzberger ally and advised to both apologize and acknowledge his “privilege.”
“I told the meeting that I was sorry for the pain that my leadership of Opinion had caused. What a pathetic thing to say. I did not think to add, because I’d lost track of this truth myself by then, that opinion journalism that never causes pain is not journalism. It can’t hope to move society forward,” Bennet continued.
Bennet said his remarks were immediately vilified on the company’s internal Slack messaging system and that he was told to resign the next morning.
“Sulzberger called me at home and, with an icy anger that still puzzles and saddens me, demanded my resignation. I got mad, too, and said he’d have to fire me. I thought better of that later. I called him back and agreed to resign, flattering myself that I was being noble,” Bennet recalled.
And now that a leftwing Democrat bag lady named Kathy Hochul has sent the National Guard into the subways to stop the runaway crime there, Mara Gay changes her tune completely on the efficacy of National Guardsmen as law enforcement officers, and the dangers they pose to black NYT staffers:
In addition to the vile partisanship at work here, there is also the question of Mara Gay’s ox being gored: She reads the stories about violent mentally-ill serial felons pitching women down to the tracks as a subway approaches. The New York Times doesn’t stoop to covering such lurid affairs, of course, but she peeks over the shoulder of lower-classers reading the New York Post on the subway.
She’s worried about her own life, and so approves of the National Guard’s presence.
And all of those shopkeepers whose stores were looted of uninsured merchandise, or had the torches set to them and were burned down to the foundation?
Fuck them. They’re just lower-middle-class shop owners, not important junior propaganda ministers for the Regime like Mara Gay.
Also, those shop-owners were Arabs, Koreans, Indians, and even Jews.
Who cares about them? They’re not the Minorities Who Matter.
Black Lives Matter — and no other lives do.
If you are a democrat they let you do these things. But, if you are an American patriot, you are trying to create a totalitarian state.
Welcome to the clown show that is the democrat party.
Well, shucks.
FREE DANIEL PENNY!
Where is that toxicology report?
Yeah, using the National Guard to put down riots puts blacks that are rioting, looting, burning and assaulting in danger, as they SHOULD be. However, the left’s anti-law enforcement puts blacks (and everyone else) that are not committing crimes in danger.
Democrats are the instigators of chaos. As long as it is their leftist useful idiots committing the chaos (which is almost 100% is), they will suppress law enforcement against it, which encourages more of it. Only when the chaos, violence and terrorism against the citizens threatens a Democrat’s election chances do they reverse course and, usually to excess, bring about some law enforcement.
Democrats rejected and ended “Stop and Frisk” that, though highly effective, violated 4th Amendment rights. How is the National Guard searching bags at the subways any different? People shoving other people onto subway tracks or carrying knives aren’t carrying bags.