After sucking up to Trump and pretending to be the “information wants to be free” guys the tech bros have suddenly turned a corner on dictatorial rule. Information actually doesn’t want to be free. Information must be curated to Newspeak. It must adhere to the strict guidelines of the newly anointed Democratic Party or else face the Purge.
To think the presence of one black BLM supporter was worthy of any more news coverage than it got (in the news story you gleaned it from) is absurd.
It is not media bias to focus predominantly on those who were armed, those who perpetrated acts of violence, and those who were taking time out of their busy lives as active police officers or elected state Republicans. It's basic news sense.
You honestly think the presence of one BLM guy warrants any more mention than it has in the face of all of that? Even when there is so much going on that it feels like the presence of unexploded bombs is being sidelined?
As for the claim that Trump may have been a half decent president without Twitter, it says a lot about your acceptance of his policies, and also ignores the fact that he is hardly (if at all) more temperate when he speaks in person.
As you pointed out, what happened the other day gave every TDS-suffering leftist the "I told you so!" opportunity of a lifetime; it was every liberal's dream come true.
Overlooked by the national media, though, is the fact that their own call to censorship is giving every conservative and Libertarian an equally profound if more internal and quieter "I told you so!" moment.
A small number of conservative numbskulls who grossly misread the situation gave the Democrats and their media minions the gratification of feeling vindicated - but their response of trying to silence all dissent isn't vindicating conservative critics - it's proving them right.
The Capital Hill rioters were, as you point out, outliers, a useful diversion.
The resulting censorship from the Left, on the other hand, is very much an accurate representation of that community.
To think the presence of one black BLM supporter was worthy of any more news coverage than it got (in the news story you gleaned it from) is absurd.
It is not media bias to focus predominantly on those who were armed, those who perpetrated acts of violence, and those who were taking time out of their busy lives as active police officers or elected state Republicans. It's basic news sense.
You honestly think the presence of one BLM guy warrants any more mention than it has in the face of all of that? Even when there is so much going on that it feels like the presence of unexploded bombs is being sidelined?
As for the claim that Trump may have been a half decent president without Twitter, it says a lot about your acceptance of his policies, and also ignores the fact that he is hardly (if at all) more temperate when he speaks in person.
As you pointed out, what happened the other day gave every TDS-suffering leftist the "I told you so!" opportunity of a lifetime; it was every liberal's dream come true.
Overlooked by the national media, though, is the fact that their own call to censorship is giving every conservative and Libertarian an equally profound if more internal and quieter "I told you so!" moment.
A small number of conservative numbskulls who grossly misread the situation gave the Democrats and their media minions the gratification of feeling vindicated - but their response of trying to silence all dissent isn't vindicating conservative critics - it's proving them right.
The Capital Hill rioters were, as you point out, outliers, a useful diversion.
The resulting censorship from the Left, on the other hand, is very much an accurate representation of that community.