NY Times: No to Tom Cotton Op-Ed, Yes to CCP Propaganda


Well, it was practically the day before yesterday when the woke, black staff of The New York Times threatened to revolt over the unconscionable decision of opinion page editor James Bennet to allow Sen. Tom Cotton to pen an op-ed calling for President Trump to “send in the troops” to quell the riots in several American cities.

The staff claimed that publishing Cotton’s op-ed put their lives in danger, because, well, that’s the way of the left these days. Free speech is violence, violence is free speech. At the end of the day, Bennet was forced out, the paper apologized for running Cotton’s op-ed, and the unpaid editors who populate Woke Twitter claimed another victory.

Somehow, though, those same activists are silent today after the newspaper chose to publish full-scale Chinese Communist Party propaganda in the form of an op-ed from Peking University professor Yi Rao.

// In content

Rao, who works directly for CCP official Ho Ping, was given space in the paper of record to claim that China was far more effective at controlling the coronavirus than the United States. After spending the majority of the piece bragging about how he and his family took their advanced American educations back to Beijing with them (because they hate the U.S., natch), Rao went on to argue that his uncle would not have died of Covid-19 if he’d been in Wuhan at the time he contracted it.

“Our family has 12 members in Wuhan, mostly on my mother’s side, and six in New York, mostly on my father’s side. All my relatives in Wuhan are safe. Uncle Eric died in New York after the pandemic had moved to the United States — the world’s strongest country militarily, the richest economically and the most advanced medically,” wrote Rao.

“The United States had two months or more to learn from China’s experience with this coronavirus, and it could have done much more to lower infection rates and fatalities,” he continued. “My father is struggling to accept his brother’s death partly, too, because he believes that he could have treated Uncle Eric — that in China Uncle Eric would have been saved.”

Uh-huh. So your dad “believes” that your uncle would have been saved in Wuhan, and that somehow qualifies as a coherent argument against the U.S.? That’s sufficiently logical to warrant inclusion in The New York Times, but Tom Cotton’s essay was beneath the editorial board’s standards? How marvelously nonsensical!

We wouldn’t have believed four years ago that The New York Times could actually get worse than they were during the election, but that just shows what we know. We can only imagine the depths to which they’ll sink over the next four.

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.