Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    NY Times Editors Endorse Mob Rule

    NY Times Editors Endorse Mob Rule

    Now this represents real change. 

    After two years of using the pages of The NY Times to lash out at peaceful health care protesters and Tea Parties, the Board of Editors of The New York Times has decided that actual violence by unions in Wisconsin is “not surprising” (emphasis mine):

    “Like many governors, [Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker] wants to cut the benefits of state workers. But he also decided a budget crisis was a good time to advance an ideological goal dear to his fellow Republicans: eliminating most collective bargaining rights for public employees.

    Not surprisingly, thousands of workers descended on the Capitol building, pounding on windows and blocking doors, yelling “shut it down.”  …

    Keeping schools closed and blocking certain public services is not a strategy we support and could alienate public opinion and play into the governor’s hand. Short of that, the unions should make their voices heard and push back hard against this misguided plan.”

    And just what does “push back hard” mean?  Those sound like fighting words to me. 

    If one of the union members hurts someone, will that also be “not surprising”?  Are the Editors contributing to a “gale of anger” the consequences of which will be their responsibility?

    And what process is it that the Editors find so distasteful that they feel mob rule is needed? Why, it’s the democratic process in the Wisconsin state legislature.

    Related Posts:
    First They Came For The Right To Retire After 30 Years On Full Salary With COLAs
    Union Hires Non-Union Members At Minimum Wage To Protest Wal-Mart
    In RI, Public Sector Unions Are The State

    Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
    Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!
    Bookmark and Share


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    What would we have to do to get the NY legislature to leave the state? It would probably be an improvement.

    timb said,

    """"You could almost hear Hugh shaking his head in disbelief."

    You can usually "almost" hear that, because the screws that long ago loosed themselves in Hugh's brain rattle when he shakes his head.""""

    –I know that Media Matters stenographers get 50 lashes for failing to turn off their peripheral vision when Fox News is on, so I must deduce you are some kind of subversive. I can almost hear you meekly protest giving Mr. Soros yet another back massage.


    Ain't it broad-minded of those lefties who have their sites like Media Matters and Think Pro[c]ess and about a half-dozen others like Washington Monthly & Newshoggers who throw a centrist or independent off a site simply for disagreeing with the agitprop theme of the day? It's sorta like you flunked outta cadre-school 101 and are irredeemably cast into the outer darkness. Only in this case, I'm living in the light and lettiing a little shine into those narrow corridors of their socialist minds.

    I think our friend 'timb' infests other sites like ann althouse from time to time. I've seen the troll paw tracks on other sites. Maybe Yglesias, which still hasn't ejected me yet. Mediaite is a place I drop bouquets on our old-fashioned marxists from time to time—they don't eject people for anything except capital crimes against thought.

    The NYT twin towers of twaddle, Punch & Keller, simply are reverting to their sit-in days of the sixties and are pre-pubescent in their understanding of the nuances of democracy.

    Here's a point from a comment on Pajamas Media:
    "The whole concept of public unions should be illegal, in that it allows members to be represented twice, once directly at the negotiating table as a union member, and again at the polling booth as a citizen of the locality. Simultaneously, each of those privately-employed citizens who together pay the bulk of the union members’ salaries have but one vote, and effectively no power to fight off the unions’ ever-greedier demands. One man, one vote? Not when there are public unions, who offer nothing but specious rationalizations and thuggery when challenged. Public unions are undemocratic in theory, and stink of nothing but corruption in reality. They must all be dissolved."

    timb, are you still with us or have you gone back to orbit?

    @dave in boca

    You said it, Dave. I do so like your style!

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend