,
5 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Counterpoint: Knee-jerk criticism of so-called knee-jerk liberalism does far more harm that any of the incidents that Nicholas Kristoff recounts in his column. nytimes.com/2019/06/29/opi…
Kristoff's evidence is limited to the Ronald Sullivan case at Harvard, a single quote from one person (George Yancey) claiming academia was hostile to faith, the revocation of a Cambridge fellowship for JBP (which he was utterly unqualified for), and of course, Oberlin. 
Oberlin. Always Oberlin. Why not Liberty? They are equally as representative of the whole of higher education institutions. Why is such shitty thinking allowed on the most influential platform for public ideas in the country?
Let's not overlook this choice little straw man. Liberals don't howl over "conservative" op-eds. They howl over shit writing and bad thinking as embodied in the oeuvres of Bret Stephens and David Brooks. It's not that they're conservative. It's that they're terrible.
For what it's worth, this Kristoff column is as bad as anything Stephens writes. Look, I'm being non-partisan!
