11/17/2011 04:51 pm ET Updated Jan 16, 2012

New York Times And Occupy Wall Street

The Mayor Confronts the Protestors

We are both horrified and appreciative of Mayor Bloomberg's clearing of Zuccotti Park. Here at the New York Times, we are most comfortable being uncomfortable: our editorial page lives in that milquetoast wishy-washy place of mild liberalism, somewhat like the guest at a Manhattan dinner party who makes mildly provocative remarks after two glasses of wine and then apologizes even though no one even noticed.

We at the Times went to Journalism school instead of getting an M.B.A. We are both envious and resentful at all of our friends making a fortune on Wall Street, and we can't decide whether we want them to pay more taxes or give our children jobs so they move out of our rent-controlled apartments on the Upper West Side. Some of said children are participating in Occupy Wall Street, but they don't own the department stores that still advertise on our pages and therefore indirectly paid for their tuition at Princeton and Bennington, respectively, even though we pleaded for Izzie to go to MIT. This is the real world. For crying out loud, we can't even afford the cabin in the Adirondacks anymore.

Therefore we urge determined restraint and decisive action when dealing with the protesters. Or decisive restraint and determined action. Whatever. Mayor Bloomberg had legitimate concerns about noise and unkempt hair and rumors of pepper spray being used as a condiment. Public safety is in the 1st amendment, after all, along with the right to land right in the middle of every issue so no one will get mad at us. The Times reaffirms both principles without reservation. Except on alternate Wednesdays. Cause we don't want a ticket.