In one day, The New York Times called for the cancellation of Mount Rushmore and compared the United States to Nazi Germany. You read that right—as most Americans prepare for the Fourth of July weekend, the gray lady seems hellbent on dismantling the country by churning out sophomoric hot takes that would make even Brian Stelter blush.

The article detailing the sullied history of the Mount Rushmore monument suffers from precisely the same kind of omissions that spurred the paper to embark upon their 1619 Project. That project was meant to fill in the blanks on American history, to add context that is not found in history books. What it has done, however, is replace one half-told story of American history with another half-told story.

The New York Times, in its story of Mount Rushmore’s racist, land-grabbing ways, only tells half the tale. This new trend of history telling is one in which we are meant to narrate our nation’s past looking at the missteps and failures only. We are meant to mitigate our successes fully by focussing so fully on our shortcomings that they outweigh any good our nation has done.

Thankfully, level-headed people were quick to point out the foolishness of the attempted Rushmore cancellation. Mark Hemingway wrote: "The New York Times newsroom is located on land 'purchased' from Native Americans for a handful of beads." And of course, that's exactly correct.