Tom Cotton is the very conservative junior senator from Arkansas, which should guarantee him a certain degree of anonymity, which he has overcome by being 1) very conservative, and 2) very articulate.
Maybe not too much of a surprise from a man who got both his undergraduate and law degree from Harvard. After which, he enlisted in the U.S. Army, where he became a paratrooper, and a Ranger, and served in combat deployments in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
I saw him have it out Sunday morning with ABC’s Jonathan Karl, who is a pretty good reporter, but who came across as an explainer for Kamala Harris.
The two battled like heavyweights in the ring, the nut being this: Cotton said Harris is an unrepentant uber liberal with a long list of far Left positions. (I listed most of them in this piece: ) Karl said she had retracted those positions, Cotton said she had not.
Here’s the truth: Through various comms flacks, Harris has stepped back from some of the positions — fracking, for instance. But the repositioning has not come from Harris herself, and it must. She’s got to say she now would not ban fracking, she now must say she’s not getting rid of private health insurance, she must now say that illegally entering the nation is unlawful and unacceptable. Until she says it, the denials don’t count.
I was listening to WPHT/1210-AM Monday morning when I heard a replay of the Cotton/Karl debate, with the right-wing hosts, of course, siding with Cotton. Well, so am I, but that is not my default. As a middlest, I try not be fair to both sides.
The hosts also told me Donald J. Trump was saying he might skip the scheduled Presidential debate on ABC in protest of the “unfair” treatment.
Well, that’s probably nothing more than his usual bullshit, and, if not, if he drops out, it would give the Democrats permission to justifiably accuse Trump of being “afraid” to debate Harris. Not a good look for him. (Later in the day it was reported both sides were quibbling over terms of the debate.)
Let me digress for a moment. Or, digress again.
Cotton was an incidental actor in a play produced by The New York Times back in 2020, when the editor of the opinion page was forced out for having the unmitigated gall to publish an op-ed by Cotton that many readers, and Times staff did not like. The essay called for troops to be used against rioters. This was a few months after the riots in 140 cities following George Floyd’s murder, which cost $1-2 billion, with hundreds of injuries. I have a feeling many Americans agreed with Cotton.
It was an opinion piece. Agree, disagree, whatever. Not at the Times.
To me, the most disturbing part was the rebellion by Times staffers, who enjoy the protection of the First Amendment themselves, but would deny it to others. Disagreeable speech is the speech that needs protecting, according to our Founders.
But not in the woke Times newsrooms. And I have seen the intrusion of political and social views altering news judgment in other newsrooms. And that intrusion builds serious mistrust among the many millions who don’t think the way they do. Contrary views must have a place at the table.
Even when those views are screamingly stupid, like the “third voice” on Monday’s WPHT show, someone filling in for Greg Stocker. (I texted an Audacy exec to ask who it was, but got no answer. It was a male who sounded like afternoon host Rich Zeoli.)
Whoever it was, taking a caroom off Monday being the third anniversary of the botched U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, rightfully complained about a recent Taliban parade of U.S. weapons disgracefully left behind. Not content to stick to good argument, and facts, he then added a shot against the “dirty, filthy” media who don’t care about about the horrors Afghan women face.
He was alleging some kind of a Leftist coverup? Like the MainStream Media is in cahoots with the Taliban? Like the story of the Afghan abuse has not been reported?
All it took was 15 seconds on Google for me to find many stories condemning the Taliban’s treatment of women — CNN, AP, BBC, Times, Washington Post, Toronto Star, U.S. News & World Report, and so on.
So where did the politicized radio grievance merchant get his facts?
From out his backside. Sheer laziness and partisanship. Yet even this jerk should be heard.
And then other jerks, like me, get to call him out.
Great article Stu. We need more men like Cotton who can articulate and defend a position. Future presidential material there.
Agreed Phil. Cotton appears to have the intelligence and communication skills needed to handle such a job.
God forbid that guy EVER gets near the White House.
Lying and cheating that’s how the democrats work. Biden ran as a centrist but governed as a far left progressive. He lied to the American people and Harris was right there beside him. People who pay attention know from her statements that Harris is a radical leftist. But it looks like she is going to follow Biden playbook and lie about her positions. What bothers me are the bias journalist who advise and encourage her to lie. It’s bad enough we have so many people who are uninformed who will believe these lies.
Agreed, 100%. Brutal honesty.
Dittos!
Yes, Daniel, it is bad when people like you are uninformed and believe the lies.
I believe Cotton said Troops to back up Guard. He also served 2 years with The Old Guard.
Rather than bash idiots like Daniel, and those that agree with his reactionary views, I’m sticking to the topic of Tom Cotton. I read that NYT piece and I found it a refreshingly different point of view. The Times has many columnists that are, in fact not “woke” (a term I despise) and have a conservative bent–Ross Douthat, Bret Stephens and David French to name a few. Those three are, or were, dyed in the wool conservative Republicans. But they’re not MAGA, and therein lies the difference. They won’t bend the knee to Donald Trump and his MAGA band of merry men (only certain women are allowed). I do not at all find the Times to be a one sided publication but instead a balanced one, which would, and should include comments by Cotton. Mitch McConnell wrote one as well, but I didn’t hear about any backlash by the staff about that one.
You and freeze have know credibility. Both of you are dishonest anti American low life’s who condone lying to the American people.
Daniel, I applaud your excellent use of the tRump handbook!
Advising someone to lie or miss represent themselves is wrong and dishonest. But like a lot of lefties you lack common sense and don’t know right from wrong. Why would anyone pay attention to a dishonest person like you.
Ending Medicare is not a good idea. Defunding the police is not a good idea. Buyback of assault weapons will not change the mental illness problems associated with criminals unlawfully possessing guns. Eliminating Immigration & Customs Enforcement Agency is a dangerously bad decision. Ending fracking will eliminate jobs in PA and contribute to inflation. Stacking the Supreme Court because you disagree with current decisions will cause long term challenges to each and every President when they take office. We could have 18, 36, justices over time if stacking the court is allowed. Ending the Electoral College is not a good idea. The Vice President needs to explain her reasoning for her views during the coming debates. I will watch the debates and listen to her explanations of why she is moving toward the center of political thought. The Nick-Namer in Chief ( President Pugsley) will attack Kamala Harris’s past views but his conduct will turn a lot people off during the debates. He can’t help himself. Her best chance of winning is the fact she isn’t Donald Trump. Policy will be ignored by a lot of uninformed voters.