Skip to comments.Leftists Now Believe the New York Times Is a “White Supremacist,” “Nazi” Paper
Posted on 01/30/2018 8:31:59 AM PST by Beave Meister
On Saturday, Ross Douthat published a column for the New York Times arguing that White House Senior Policy Advisor Stephen Miller should be included in negotiations about immigration policy because he represents the opinions of tens of millions of Americans. Somewhat predictably, the Timess liberal readership was none too pleased by the idea that proponents of increased restrictions on legal immigration would be given a seat at the table alongside proponents of amnesty, and many took to Twitter to express their displeasure. Some more unhinged commenters labeled the Times a white supremacist paper, while others were content with simply suggesting that Douthat is a racist.
Because Saturday was Holocaust Memorial Day, some Twitter leftists apparently thought that Douthats piece was promoting Nazism or attacking Jews. Canadian film producer and actress Nadine Van der Velde was especially perturbed:
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Yet more proof, as if we needed it, that liberalism is a mental disorder.
Enforcing the law is the new “Nazism” to the radical left. Would they really be happy in a lawless anarchy? No, they’re never happy. They reap what they sow.
I have heard this from liberal friends as well, and it’s not only the editorialists they are mad about. They think Haberman is far too soft on Trump. They want every single article to say that Trump will be impeached on the morrow, basically. If it doesn’t say that, then it’s carrying water for the fascisti. When she criticized the many factual errors in the Wolff book, there were a lot of cancelled subscriptions.
The Slimes is so mistrusted outside of the left wing BECUSE they’re in the tank for the left, still despite that because they aren’t openly sold out enough the twits on the “there’s nothing left of the old extreme left that’s extreme to the left anymore” are calling the Nazis!
Anarchy is just an excuse, a pretense.
They are about, have always been about, birthing their tyranny and shoving their boots down on the face of mankind forever.
You forgot the key part... ‘Socialist’, White Supremacist, Nazi Paper.’
They’re also hypocritical about it. The sort of tyranny they want for all of us does not apply to themselves. It’s always that way for people who want to control others.
Good. Hoping libs boycott their rag of record and make it go bankrupt.
A Nazi newspaper run by leftist Jews. Mmmmmmm then again anythings possible with mental disorder LIEberals.
Honestly, that’s one of the reasons why I absolutely refuse to list “anarchism” as being of the far right, or indeed a right-wing view (if anything, it belongs in the same place as Communism, Fascism, and Naziism, which is on the left). As if the fact that there were quite a few radical leftists who advocated for complete anarchy in some way or another (heck, Foucault for one advocated for getting rid of ANY courts at all, even socialist people’s courts, and just having “popular justice” akin to the September Massacres) wasn’t enough of a hint that anarchism is truly a left-wing ideology rather than right-wing.
Nice to see the left is eating their own, though, that the NYT is getting its just desserts.
I think the reason anarchy is viewed as right-wing by some, is because they misunderstand the term “limited government”. It does not mean “no government”, it means limited to doing what only the government can do, and leaving everything else to the private sector. Liberals are basically extremists. They either want no private sector at all, or no government at all. I’ve known liberals who were in the latter category, although those are getting very rare in this country.
Yeah, and that’s assuming they even adhere to any consistent values, especially the post-modern types who view everything as relative and fluid rather than fixed right down to morality. They’re basically the Joker. Though to be fair, Jesus can technically qualify as extremist, and he’s right wing. And I tend to be extreme in my views as well, mostly because I hate grays and relativism, which I see as no different from nihilism.
Yes extremism doesn’t have to be a negative thing. It’s very appropriate for beliefs relating to moral values, if they’re the ones stated in the Bible. Liberals don’t seem to understand that Christianity is not political, nor do proper Christians desire to control what others do. Jesus said “My kingdom is not of this world”. He also said if someone refuses to hear your message, shake the dust from your shoes and move on. But there are a few (far fewer than they claim) examples of Christianity being used for a negative purpose. Extremism can also be a bad thing.
Yeah, though I’m pretty sure God does ultimately desire to control what other people do. He did tell us to go out and spread the good news to the four corners of the world in the Gospels, and I can see no other way to do so than via force, to ensure God is Emperor over His creation as he desired the day he created existence. Otherwise, he’d pull a Jimmy Carter and leave us to die.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.