Brother Pakuni:
When we're afraid to listen to those who don't agree with us, we head down a path where the military eventually starts shooting -- and it's never good.
You can make all the false parallels you want. You're entitled. But the reality is that when we're afraid to listen, as we are way too often now, we go down a slippery slope toward wackiness. What you and I are arguing is degree.
The greatness of America is our marketplace of ideas.
Not allowing Tom Cotton to espouse his idiot thoughts in the New York Times will lead to the military shooting people?
Talk about slippery slopes toward wackiness.
Sorry, brother dgies, but I'm a firm believer that some ideas are sh*tty and undeserving of publication in a forum such as the NY Times. Certainly you wouldn't argue that David Duke is entitled to an op-ed piece in the Times, right? You wouldn't call staff objections to that "wacky," would you?
Calling for the military to use force against fellow Americans isn't quite white nationalism, but it has been outlawed in this nation's history except in the absolute rarest of circumstances because our Founding Fathers recognized it as a sh*tty idea. The Times, nor anyone else, need not be in the business of giving a massive platform to such sh*tty ideas. If Tom Cotton wants to express his terrible views on the marketplace of ideas, he has lots of opportunity, up to and including on the floor of the U.S. Senate. He isn't owed a spot in the Times, and saying that is not wacky.
An irony here is that you defend Cotton's op-ed as part of the "marketplace of ideas," but when Times staffers contribute to the marketplace with their ideas - that Cotton doesn't deserve use of that platform to urge military action against fellow Americans - well, then, that's just wacky.
Marketplace for me but not for thee?
