The New York Times has done some pretty shameful things lately, but there’s nothing quite as shameful as ignoring the violence brought on by fascist free-speech haters on campus and blaming it all on conservatives. But that’s just what columnist Jeremy W. Peters did in his piece, “In Ann Coulter’s Speech Battle, Signs That Conservatives Are Emboldened:”
Without uttering a word to students at the University of California, Berkeley, Ann Coulter on Wednesday made herself the latest cause célèbre in the rapidly escalating effort by conservatives to fight liberals on what was once the left’s moral high ground over free speech on campus.
Ms. Coulter, the acid-penned conservative writer, canceled a planned appearance on Thursday after the political organizations that invited her rescinded their support over fears of violence. “It’s a sad day for free speech,” she said.
But across the country, conservatives like her are eagerly throwing themselves into volatile situations like the one in Berkeley, emboldened by a backlash over what many Americans see as excessive political correctness, a president who has gleefully taken up their fight, and liberals they accuse of trying to censor any idea they disagree with.
Wait, conservatives are the ones throwing themselves into volatile situations? Isn’t that like saying, “Girls in short skirts are kind of asking for it?” And notice how Peters words his opening sentence to say conservatives are bringing the fight to liberals when it's clearly the other way around. Conservatives want to sit and listen to a lecture; it’s liberals who want to bash their heads in just for showing up.
Here’s Peters on Twitter promoting his piece. Notice how it's also Trump's fault:
The outraged responses were swift:
And then Peters tried defending himself, albeit pitifully:
Peters then tried to say Coulter and Milo Yiannopoulos handpicked Berkeley for the most effective provocation, ignoring -- no, hiding the fact that they were invited by campus conservative groups. We're on to you, Peters: