If a newspaper or network keeps reporting on those who call themselves "government" doing the same thing over and over, but won't publish criticisms from the intended victims each and every time, isn't that favoritism?
Of course it is.
Sure, I want to know when some bully is threatening to violate me, but to keep criticisms from being heard, on the basis of it being "too repetitive", only helps those bullies get away with it. The criticisms are repetitive only because the violations are repetitive.
The bullies of "government" sometimes (in fact, almost always) keep proposing to violate you in the same way until it finally gets imposed. They keep harping on the issue until they get their way. The media rarely points out that "government" is repetitive in its schemes- but just try to publish a letter to the editor or a column addressing the potential violation each and every time it is proposed or discussed and you'll get shut off. It's like the media is hoping the memory of your rational objections will fade, and the violation will eventually be imposed without anyone speaking up.
It's like the never-ending push for anti-gun "laws". If the bullies don't get their way this month, they'll be back next month with the same "idea". They do the same with their theft proposals.
Take away the soapbox, just like the ballot box and jury box have been taken away, and you leave most people no peaceful recourse. Maybe that's what the media hopes- after all, bloodshed sells papers and attracts viewers.
.
I always marvel at this fact-How the media continues to fawn over individuals who are confirmed liars, thieves, murderers, rapists and pedophiles just because they have some title before their name like Senator, Congressman, or Secretary-of-Fucking-Whatever.
ReplyDeleteThinking, rational people easily see that these kinds of individuals have NO credibility whatsoever, yet the media holds them up as gods who MUST be listened to. And, of course, obeyed.
I was thinking of my recently rejected column- but also of several times people have told me their letters to the editor were rejected because "we've already published letters addressing that. It's time to move on". Yet, those advocating violating our liberty never move on. Never.
Delete"Time to move on" - What they say after the state declares victory, real or imagined.
DeleteTypical response to a discussion about state secession: "That was already decided in 1865. Time to move on."