Times hires left-wing bigot for editorial board

The New York Times, for its editorial board, hired a 30-year-old tech writer named Sarah Jeong, an American immigrant from South Korea. But Jeong, only a few years ago, posted a series of offensive, antiwhite tweets.

Her anti-white tweets included the following:

“Dumbass f****ing white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants.”

“Oh man it’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men.”

“I dare you to get on Wikipedia and play ‘Things white people can definitely take credit for, it’s really hard.”

“Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins(?)”

The New York Times stands by its decision. You see, said The New York Times in a statement, Jeong was merely being sarcastic. She was actually mocking the racism of her twitter detractors. She was, in effect, trolling the trolls. The Times said: “Her journalism and the fact that she is a young Asian woman have made her a subject of frequent online harassment. For a period of time she responded to that harassment by imitating the rhetoric of her harassers. She sees now that this approach only served to feed the vitriol that we too often see on social media. She regrets it, and The Times does not condone it.”

As defenses go, The New York Times’ defense of its new editorial board hire is creative. But what about Jeong’s anti-cop and antimale tweets? Here’s a sample:

“Cops are a**holes.” “Let me know when a cop gets killed by a rock or molotov cocktail or a stray shard of glass from a precious precious window.”

“If we’re talking big sweeping bans on s—- that kills people, why don’t we ever ever ever ever talk about banning the police?”

“I SURE WOULD FIGHT THE COPS WITH MY GUNS, I WONDER WHY BLACK PEOPLE HAVEN’T THOUGHT OF THAT.”

“My point is that we should kill all the men *prior* to removing the state from marriage as an institution.”

Was Jeong still being satirical when she attacked cops, too?

In an earnings call last November, John Schnatter, the founder of Papa John’s, gave the following analysis of why his company’s third-quarter earnings were disappointing. Schnatter said: “The NFL has hurt us. … We are disappointed the NFL and its leadership did not resolve this.” He was referring to the NFL national anthem player protests, which he insisted should have been “nipped in the bud” the previous year. Schnatter said, “Leadership starts at the top, and this is an example of poor leadership.”

Critics called his comments “racist” because most of the players in the NFL are black, as are most of the protestors. Therefore, Schnatter was being racist by objecting to the mostly black kneelers. Schnatter apologized, but Papa John’s stock tumbled after Schnatter’s NFL comment, and in January, Schnatter stepped down as CEO.

Schnatter eventually resigned as chairman of the board for something he said months later. In a May telephone conference call about how his company can be more racially tolerant and sensitive, Schnatter reportedly defended his November NFL comments by stating, “Colonel Sanders called blacks n*****s,” yet, claimed Schnatter, never faced public backlash. Schnatter was out. Never mind his claim that he was quoting someone else during a role-playing exercise.

Roseanne Barr, a few months ago, lost her show because of a “racist” tweet about former Obama White House aide and consultant, Valerie Jarrett. Barr tweeted: “muslim brotherhood & planet of the apes had a baby=vj.” Barr claimed she did not know Jarrett was black, making her tweet offensive, argued Barr, but not racist.

As for Jeong, a CNN political commentator claimed that it is impossible for Jeong to be racist. Symone Sanders says racism requires power. Sanders apparently believes that only white men possess power and therefore a woman of Korean heritage is incapable of racism. Sanders said, “Being racist is not just prejudice, it’s prejudice plus power. So one could argue that some of her tweets, even within context, note that she has a prejudice, perhaps, against white men, but that, in fact, does not make her racist. I don’t think she is a racist. … Could she have some not just implicit, but, you know, negative bias toward white men in America due to perhaps what she is experienced throughout her life?”

Contrast Sanders’ definition of racism with that of The New York Times’ columnist Charles Blow. In an article about President Donald Trump’s alleged racism, Blow said: “Racism is simply the belief that race is an inherent and determining factor in a person’s or a people’s character and capabilities, rendering some inferior and others superior.”

That sounds a lot like the new member of The New York Times editorial board.