NYT Graciously Admits the 1st Amendment Applies to Conservatives – IOTW Report

NYT Graciously Admits the 1st Amendment Applies to Conservatives

DMF:

The fact that conservatives benefit from the First Amendment is not something to bemoan. It is part of the constitutional bargain.”- NYT

According to a new op-ed, folks on the left are “increasingly” making the claim that Republicans have “weaponized” the First Amendment. It seems the scary words are just too much for some to bear. Spoken or written ideas are simply too potent.

Fortunately, your political betters at The New York Times are bigger than that. They’ve just run an editorial written by David Cole. He’s the national legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union. You may know them as the organization that occasionally cares about a subset of constitutional issues they agree with. Despite the allegedly-serious argument that “the First Amendment’s very neutrality is problematic, because in an unequal society, the amendment will favor the haves over the have-nots,” the ACLU (and the Times) has decided that free speech is important. That the Constitution applies to to all citizens is quiet a concept!  MORE

5 Comments on NYT Graciously Admits the 1st Amendment Applies to Conservatives

  1. So my right to speak as a conservative is part of the “Constitutional bargain”. Similar to when two baseball teams announce a blockbuster trade which includes, “a player to be named later,” which is usually some obscure marginal player. Well, we are that later-named player per the NYT and ACLU. You know, part of the bargain.

    1
  2. Insert another word for “Conservative” and see what the statement from the NYT above actually suggests. “Flat-Earthers”, “Climate Deniers” “Catholics”, “Mentally disabled”
    Fuck you NYT!

    4
  3. They don’t get shall not be infringed with regard to 2A. So what would make us believe that they get no law prohibiting the exercise, or abridging the freedom of speech? Evidence clearly shows that the left is totalitarian in all its instincts.

    8
  4. Have you seen the pronouns we’re being forced to use in order to describe someone for 1 of 58 different genders?
    Yet, those who choose to use only 1 of 2 pronouns to address a male or female somehow weaponizes the first amendment.

    2

Comments are closed.