Featuring Right thinking from a left brain, doing the job the American Media Maggots won’t, embracing ubiquitous, sagacious perspicacity and broadcasting behind enemy lines in Occupied Fornicalia from the veritable Belly of the Beast, the Bill Mill in Sacramento, Fornicalia, I continue to proffer my thanks to the SHR Media Network for allowing me to utilize their studio and hijack their air twice weekly, Tuesdays and Thursday nights, thanks to my shameless contract — as well as appear on the Sack Heads: Against Tyranny Show every Wednesday night.
Hour 1: BZspoke to The Exceptional Conservative himself, KEN McCLENTON of TECN TV. We talked about radio, video, putting together radio broadcasts, Ken’s staff, and his having attended the DC rally “Demand Free Speech” on July 6th! No, Ken wasn’t there to serve the drinks; he was instead invited to speak at the DC event with Laura Loomer, Milo Yiannopoulos and more. We discovered that Ken was also banned from Twitter for two-and-a-half years. “If you haven’t been banned and you’re a Conservative you’re not doing it right!” Ken said.
Ken asked: “Conservatives: why are you asking Facebook to be ‘fair” when their entire interest is to destroy America, destroy the Constitution, destroy the flag and be a charter member of Venezuela’s future?”
Ken also postulated that there is no such thing as hate speech — there is only speech — and that the pussification of American is rampant.
And Ken insisted: if you like what you hear, spread BZ all around. Spread Ken all around.
Ken said that “we are at war for the conscience of America.” The Left is predicated on three things: steal, kill and destroy.
“We are not ashamed of the Good News of Conservatism for It is the Power of Liberation First, to the Republican, and then, the Democrat.”
Hour 2:BZ continued to speak with KEN McCLENTON, then we transitioned to the Ron Edwards Notebook, and thence into phone calls. And from there into regret over going digital. It will be the downfall of civilization. And much more. Give a listen.
By the way, if you didn’t already know, BZis in fact on iHeart radio. Click here.
If you want to listen to the show on Spreaker, audio only, click on the yellow button below.
If you care to watch the show on the SHR Media YouTube channel, click on the red arrow below. We kindly ask you to SUBSCRIBE to the SHR Media channel.
Though either Facebook or XSplit screwed up our Facebook broadcast tonight, please like us and follow us on Facebook!
Join me, the Bloviating Zeppelin(on Twitter @BZep, Facebook as Biff Zeppe and the Bloviating Zeppelin, and on Gab.ai @BZep), every Tuesday and Thursday night on the SHR Media Network from 11 PM to 1 AM Eastern and 8 PM to 10 PM Pacific, at the Berserk Bobcat Saloon — where the speech is free but the booze is not.
As ever, thank you so kindly for listening, commenting, and interacting in the chat room or listening later via podcast.
Please remember we only monitor the chat room at SHRMEDIA.COM — though there is chat available on both Facebook and YouTube. Come on over to the SHR chat room where you’ll meet great friends!
Want to listen to all the Berserk Bobcat Saloon archives on Spreaker? Go here.
A professor’s call to shut down our nation’s universities
by Jason D. Hill, Opinion Contributor
Thirty-three years ago, when I entered college, left-wing ideologies dominated American universities, and especially the humanities and social sciences. But one still could get a fair, balanced education by consulting traditional canonical texts that countered the dogma. Free speech was alive on college campuses. There were hisses and boos, of course, but for the most part, hearing perspectives different from your own was considered essential to your education. Few of us lived in our own curated silos.
Today, after 22 years of being a college professor, and having traveled much of America to lecture, I am sad to say the situation is not the same. The core principles and foundations that keep the United States intact, that provide our citizens with their civic personalities and national identities, are being annihilated. The gravest internal threat to this country is not illegal aliens; it is leftist professors who are waging a war against America and teaching our young people to hate this country.
Our universities risk losing their status as learning sites and becoming national security threats. We need to defund them, disband and rebuild them with conservative principles — that is, values advocating individualism, capitalism, Americanism, free speech, self-reliance and the morality of wealth creation.
Astounding rhetoric from, essentially, a Leftist. Any Professor of Philosophy certainly isn’t a screaming Conservative.
Ordinarily, the best way to counter an intellectual adversary is through a contest of rational faculties. The person with reality on his or her side, with the best relevant facts and strongest arguments, usually wins. But today’s scholars in humanities and social sciences increasingly declare that modern argumentation is a white, Western form of domination and linguistic imperialism that silences racial and ethnic minorities and devalues their “lived experiences.”
One cannot argue with such people. The only alternative is to shut them down.
From the show:
“Bolshevik-loving welfare scholars.” Jesus, Mary and Joseph, what a beautimous and applicable line from the interview.
Professor Hill concludes with this paragraph:
Withdraw your support and leave them to fund themselves. Let them pit their wares on the free market, where they will be left homeless. The world you desired no longer exists in our universities. It lies elsewhere, in a philosophic system waiting to be discovered or created.
I can’t say I disagree in the slightest. Let universities compete in a capitalist, free-market economy. To the competitive winners go the spoils.
As most people of a Conservative bent already know — it’s certainly no secret — the social media giants love Leftists because they are Leftists. They are the first to quash the accounts of Conservatives whilst tolerating the same precise activity by Leftists. The hypocrisy is unabashed, obvious, clear, flaunted and entirely unacknowledged by the social media giants themselves. With one slight adjunct exception. Later.
This has been documented hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands of times. Twitter has “shadow-banning.” And NO social media site will tell you precisely why you were “suspended” or had your account removed wholesale — instead providing a paragraph or two of mushy non-descript weasel words.
For fuck’s sake, people have told me I’ve been shadow-banned for a time. And I have about two followers.
There is an alternative social media site called Gab.ai, which takes pride in the fact that it doesn’t remove people for political reasons simply due to disagreement. I am a member of Gab but have been a shadow of my former self at that site because, well, I find it kinda clunky and the interface — to me — is less than intuitive. I say that predicated upon the fact that I am in my 7th decade. And oh yeah: a TechnoLuddite.
At one time, however, Gab.ai was so popular that it took me well over a month before I was approved. I don’t know why that is, I simply know that it was. Backlog? Lack of technicians due to a massive flood of converts? I truly do not know.
But I am a full member of Gab.ai now and I submit: perhaps you should be too. Quickly.
I received an email from Gab.ai on December 11th, and it read as follows:
GAB.
Hello everyone,
We’ve made some incredible progress this month on the product in preparation for Twitter’s strict new enforcement rules that will be going live on December 18th. Twitter will be judging user behavior both on and OFF of their website. Meaning if you visit another website that they don’t like or show “support” for groups they don’t like, you can get banned. This unprecedented level of censorship and blacklisting of groups from the public square is unlike anything in history and will be a huge opportunity for Gab.
Of course, on Leftist sites it goes something like this. From Mashable.com:
Twitter to neo-Nazis: you have until December 18
by Kerry Flynn
Twitter is cracking down on hate speech and not just by looking at its own site.
Oh really. Do tell. Wait for it. . .
In what amounts to a major shift in Twitter policy, the company announced on Friday that it will be monitoring user’s behavior “on and off the platform” and will suspend a user’s account if they affiliate with violent organizations, according to an update to Twitter’s Help Center on Friday.
Certainly Twitter will be as responsive and clear and transparent as it’s been with every other Conservative issue to date. Of course. History meet lies.
“You also may not affiliate with organizations that — whether by their own statements or activity both on and off the platform — use or promote violence against civilians to further their causes,” the update reads.
The Dec. 18 deadline also applies to using “hateful images or symbols” in profile images or profile headers. Twitter will also monitor for hate speech in usernames, display names, and profile bios.
This new rule closes a loophole that Twitter’s critics had long pointed out: That known white supremacists and others affiliated with hate groups could still use the platform to send a sanitized version of their message and use their followers to bolster their overall profile.
Let me break it down for the uninitiated. Signing up for Twitter or Facebook will be similar to submitting to chipping. And that’s not so far off.
In the same article:
Twitter’s decision to monitor users off site sparked concern from free speech advocates such as Andrew Torba, founder of social network Gab. “This is a scary precedent to set,” he wrote in an email to Mashable. “Rules like this will only force dissidents and those who are speaking truth to power to silence themselves or risk being silenced by Twitter.”
There were actions and reactions, this being Monday, December 18th. Two articles from incidents that occurred immediately.
Twitter Bans Account Retweeted by President Trump
by Chris Tomlinson
Twitter began its “purge” of right-wing accounts Monday and has terminated the account of Britain First deputy leader Jayda Fransen, who reached global attention after she was retweeted three times by U.S. President Donald Trump last month.
Ms. Fransen, along with the official Britain First Twitter account and the account of leader Paul Golding, was suspended Monday afternoon. The banning comes after Fransen posted three videos purporting to show Muslim violence which were retweeted by President Trump and caused outrage among the establishment class who labelled the videos racist.
Britain First is a patriotic political party and street movement that opposes and fights the many injustices that are routinely inflicted on the British people.
Our policies are pro-British, our approach is no-nonsense and our principles are not open to compromise.
We love our people, our nation, our heritage and culture and will defend them at all times and no matter what odds we face.
The Britain First movement is not just a normal political group, we are a patriotic resistance and “frontline” for our long suffering people.
We require only the most stern, dedicated, loyal, steadfast and incorruptible men and women to help us build a future for our nation.
We want a Britain that is strong, proud, free, sovereign and independent, in which our people live in a healthy, moral and ethical society.
We want our people to come first, before foreigners, asylum seekers or migrants and we are overtly proud of this stance.
We will not stand back and watch as our people are made second class citizens by leftwing-liberal policies and political correctness.
We want British history, traditions and to be respected, promoted and taught to our young folk who deserve a decent future.
We want to eradicate corruption in our democracy, to end the ongoing expenses scandal and restore principles and decency to politics in general.
Heinous! Pro sovereignty. Anti-corruption. Putting Britain first (instead of the rest of the planet — how quaint), love of nation, heritage and culture. Japan is allowed to have, for example, a love of nation, heritage and culture. So is Afghanistan. Why not Britain?
BritainFirst.org has, naturally, had its Twitter account suspended.
Then this from Breitbart.com because, after all, they were inspired by Twitter today, yes?
YouTube Temporarily Bans Europeans from Viewing Cernovich Documentary on Migrant Rape Crisis
by Charlie Nash
YouTube banned Mike Cernovich’s documentary on Sweden’s refugee crisis from being viewed in European countries, then restored the video but placed it in “YouTube Jail,” disabling comments and sharing, while adding a warning message to viewers.
Cernovich shared the email from YouTube that informed him his documentary, Invasion! How Sweden Became the Rape Capital of the West, which was published in March, would be censored in Europe on Thursday.
My documentary on Sweden, which has no nudity or foul language, has been banned in the EU.
– No explanation given – No legal right to appeal – No due process#NetNeutrality is a scam, social media companies do not support a free and open internet.https://youtu.be/KSGuzv-2qUY
“We have received a legal complaint regarding your video. After review, the following video: Invasion! How Sweden Became the Rape Capital of the West has been blocked from view on the following YouTube country site(s),” declared the company, before listing, “Austria, Bulgaria, Switzerland, Czech Republic, Germany, Estonia, France, United Kingdom, French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Croatia, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Lithuania, Latvia, Martinique, New Caledonia, French Polynesia, Poland, Saint Pierre and Miquelon, Reunion, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, French Southern Territories, Wallis and Futuna, [and] Mayotte.”
Hey, question for Leftists: does this sound like the “net neutrality” you so lovingly embraced? Not to me.
This also creates any number of unforeseen — or is it purposeful — consequences. You’ll now have a new Twitter Narc Class who will take it upon themselves to point at others and scream.
If you recall, we were already admonished to narc on others via Obama’s “reporting of fishy emails” regarding ObamaKare, from TheHill.com:
President Obama: Withdraw citizen reporting program
A troubling new citizen reporting program is being launched at the White House -– targeting those who oppose President Obama’s health care plan –- a program that can only stifle constitutionally-protected free speech.
In an official White House release posted by the White House Director of New Media, Macon Phillips claims that “[t]here is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there” both on the web and floating around in chain emails. Phillips states that “[s]ince we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.
This is a very disturbing attempt to stifle the free speech of Americans who have the constitutional right to express their opinion and concerns about health care.It’s a move designed to intimidate those who have legitimate concerns about the health care plan.And, worse, it turns the White House into some sort of self-appointed “speech police” -– urging Americans to monitor and report those who engage in “fishy” speech.
What will Obama do with those names. Who will be flagged next?
Omigosh Leftists, have you forgotten that so soon? Conveniently so? Should we go to the Russian Model and have duly appointed Political Officers on Twitter and other Leftist social media platforms. We’re not so far away. Frankly, I’d appreciate being able to identify the obvious uniform. Ah, the heady days of the Stasi.
Any other problems? Would you have to obliterate people with a picture of a Confederate flag anywhere in their digital rumblings? How about a Communist flag? How about Antifa? Any linkage to the quite violent Antifa at all?
Further, how would you accomplish this digital search? How many people to assign this task. Evidence? Warrants? Of course not, Simply a Digital Pogrom via your Digital Gestapo. Thousands of Arabic accounts that are astoundingly anti-Semitic? General anti-Semitic accounts or mentions? What about the homophobic, misogynistic accounts of Muslims? Doesn’t a Saudi prince own an assload of Twitter anyway? Why, yes.
This Saudi prince now owns more of Twitter than Jack Dorsey does
by Alice Truong
A Saudi prince has increased his holdings in Twitter, making him the company’s second largest shareholder.
Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Bin Abdulaziz Alsaud, who in 2011 invested $300 million in the social network, now owns 34.9 million shares of Twitter’s common stock, according to a new regulatory filing (pdf).
At nearly 5.2%, his stake in the company is now larger than that of Jack Dorsey, Twitter’s co-founder and newly re-minted CEO, whose 21.86 million shares give him 3.2% of the company, according to FactSet. (The prince previously had a stake of roughly 3%.)
Twitter co-founder Ev Williams remains the company’s largest shareholder, with 46.56 million shares for a 6.9% stake.
Didn’t Twitter originally bill itself as a “free speech platform”? Yes. So did UC Berkeley at one point. Look at them both now.
Twitter has now given itself the authority to police every Tweet. Every one. And for the behavior of each and every individual who sends Tweets — and that, of course, would apply, obviously per President Trump, to those who re-Tweet things as well.
What if nothing Tweeted is considered “offensive” by Twitter, but one’s off-site behavior is deemed “offensive”? Account suspended.
Twitter once billed itself as the “free speech wing of the free speech party.” AYFKM? No. Not at all.
Will these rules be applied in anything remotely resembling consistency, fairness, competence? Hardly. That’s similar to expecting consistency, fairness and competency from government.
Welcome to your officially-declared 2017 Digital Gestapo.
Millennials would rather live in socialist or communist nation than under capitalism: Poll
by Bradford Richardson
‘This troubling turn highlights widespread historical illiteracy in American society’
The majority of millennials would prefer to live in a socialist, communist or fascist nation rather than a capitalistic one, according to a new poll.
In the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation’s “Annual Report on U.S. Attitudes Toward Socialism,” 58 percent of the up-and-coming generation opted for one of the three systems, compared to 42 percent who said they were in favor of capitalism.
The most popular socioeconomic order was socialism, with 44 percent support. Communism and fascism received 7 percent support each.
Marion Smith, executive director of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, said the report shows millennials are “increasingly turning away from capitalism and toward socialism and even communism as a viable alternative.”
Thank you very much, American “educators” (I bandy that term quite very loosely), Leftists, Demorats and, naturally, the American Media Maggots for doing such a spectacular job of disseminating your staggeringly-slanted, agendized bias. Your lies are working on the mush-minds of our youth.
“This troubling turn highlights widespread historical illiteracy in American society regarding socialism and the systemic failure of our education system to teach students about the genocide, destruction, and misery caused by communism since the Bolshevik Revolution one hundred years ago,” Mr. Smith said in a statement.
This very interesting point:
Millennials were the only age group more likely to say America’s economic system “works against me” rather than “works for me.” Gen Z had the most positive impression of the economy, with 66 percent saying it “works for me,” although many of them have yet to enter the workforce.
On that note, we recently noted 100 years of Communism. From WSJ.com:
100 Years of Communism—and 100 Million Dead
by David Satter
The Bolshevik plague that began in Russia was the greatest catastrophe in human history.
Armed Bolsheviks seized the Winter Palace in Petrograd—now St. Petersburg—100 years ago this week and arrested ministers of Russia’s provisional government. They set in motion a chain of events that would kill millions and inflict a near-fatal wound on Western civilization.
The revolutionaries’ capture of train stations, post offices and telegraphs took place as the city slept and resembled a changing of the guard. But when residents of the Russian capital awoke, they found they were living in a different universe.
And then all the buttery political fun began.
Although the Bolsheviks called for the abolition of private property, their real goal was spiritual: to translate Marxist- Lenin ist ideology into reality. For the first time, a state was created that was based explicitly on atheism and claimed infallibility. This was totally incompatible with Western civilization, which presumes the existence of a higher power over and above society and the state.
Now you begin to see the clouds parting, yes? Western civilization, i.e. more and more citizens in the United States, eschew the existence of a higher power like some tin idol named “godd” or “Bill” or “Berford.” As far as they are concerned, all good things come from The State in terms of our government with one major, vitally-important exception: those damned pesky papers called our “foundational documents” like the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
They are, like, so totally uncool, dude.
The Bolshevik coup had two consequences. In countries where communism came to hold sway, it hollowed out society’s moral core, degrading the individual and turning him into a cog in the machinery of the state. Communists committed murder on such a scale as to all but eliminate the value of life and to destroy the individual conscience in survivors.
Note this:
In a 1920 speech to the Komsomol, Lenin said that communists subordinate morality to the class struggle. Good was anything that destroyed “the old exploiting society” and helped to build a “new communist society.”
Starting to sound a bit familiar?
This approach separated guilt from responsibility. Martyn Latsis, an official of the Cheka, Lenin’s secret police, in a 1918 instruction to interrogators, wrote: “We are not waging war against individuals. We are exterminating the bourgeoisie as a class. . . . Do not look for evidence that the accused acted in word or deed against Soviet power. The first question should be to what class does he belong. . . . It is this that should determine his fate.”
Then there’s this disturbing part that today’s educators and students miss entirely — perhaps the most disturbing.
Such convictions set the stage for decades of murder on an industrial scale. In total, no fewer than 20 million Soviet citizens were put to death by the regime or died as a direct result of its repressive policies. This does not include the millions who died in the wars, epidemics and famines that were predictable consequences of Bolshevik policies, if not directly caused by them.
The victims include 200,000 killed during the Red Terror (1918-22); 11 million dead from famine and dekulakization; 700,000 executed during the Great Terror (1937-38); 400,000 more executed between 1929 and 1953; 1.6 million dead during forced population transfers; and a minimum 2.7 million dead in the Gulag, labor colonies and special settlements.
To this list should be added nearly a million Gulag prisoners released during World War II into Red Army penal battalions, where they faced almost certain death; the partisans and civilians killed in the postwar revolts against Soviet rule in Ukraine and the Baltics; and dying Gulag inmates freed so that their deaths would not count in official statistics.
If we add to this list the deaths caused by communist regimes that the Soviet Union created and supported—including those in Eastern Europe, China, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam and Cambodia—the total number of victims is closer to 100 million.
Then this fact — not a suggestion, but a fact:
That makes communism the greatest catastrophe in human history.
Yay Communism.
What is it I’ve said for years? “Everybody always thinks they can do Socialism/Communism better than the last guy.” Except: it never works.
Also this, ripped from today’s screaming headlines about the opinions regarding “freedom” (hok-putui, such a nasty word) on today’s university campuses, from of all places the WashingtonPost.com:
A chilling study shows how hostile college students are toward free speech
by Catherine Rampell
Here’s the problem with suggesting that upsetting speech warrants “safe spaces,” or otherwise conflating mere words with physical assault: If speech is violence, then violence becomes a justifiable response to speech.
Just ask college students. A fifth of undergrads now say it’s acceptable to use physical force to silence a speaker who makes “offensive and hurtful statements.”
That’s one finding from a disturbing new survey of students conducted by John Villasenor, a Brookings Institution senior fellow and University of California at Los Angeles professor.
We already know about speech being the “same” as violence according to Leftists.
In August, motivated by concerns about the “narrowing window of permissible topics” for discussion on campuses, Villasenor conducted a nationwide survey of 1,500 undergraduate students at four-year colleges. Financial support for the survey was provided by the Charles Koch Foundation, which Villasenor said had no involvement in designing, administering or analyzing the questionnaire; as of this writing, the foundation had also not seen his results.
Many of Villasenor’s questions were designed to gauge students’ understanding of the First Amendment. Colleges, after all, pay a lot of lip service to “freedom of speech,” despite high-profile examples of civil-liberty-squelching on campus. The survey suggests that this might not be due to hypocrisy so much as a misunderstanding of what the First Amendment actually entails.
The most shocking?
For example, when students were asked whether the First Amendment protects “hate speech,” 4 in 10 said no. This is, of course, incorrect. Speech promoting hatred — or at least, speech perceived as promoting hatred — may be abhorrent, but it is nonetheless constitutionally protected.
51% of U.S. Muslims want Sharia; 60% of young Muslims more loyal to Islam than to U.S.
by Robert Spencer
Really, what did you expect? A considerable portion of U.S. domestic and foreign policy is based on the assumption that Islam in the U.S. will be different: that Muslims here believe differently from those elsewhere, and do not accept the doctrines of violence against and subjugation of unbelievers that have characterized Islam throughout its history. But on what is that assumption based? Nothing but wishful thinking. And future generations of non-Muslims will pay the price.
51% of Muslims living in the U.S. just this June (2015) told Polling Co. they preferred having “the choice of being governed according to Shariah,” or Islamic law. Or the 60% of Muslim-Americans under 30 who told Pew Research they’re more loyal to Islam than America.
These are all clues. These are all indicators of America in the desperate grip of those who wish to tear this country apart from within. Presently there is an active attempt to install mob rule in the United States utilizing not just overt violence, but a highly-funded, organized and systematic undermining, overtaking, eliminating and rewriting of our fundamental founding documents, our history in written form, in oral form, in photographic form and in physical form.
Universities, once admirable towers of higher learning and critical thought now tolerate none of it. The past two generations are shockingly willing to relinquish almost every freedom they possess — to have the government, when it deigns so, to sell those freedoms back. More and more the government is disinterested in such a sale. It simply wants to acquire and keep the power and control.
Is it for this that 500,000 Americans died in the Civil War — so we can become slaves of the government? Do the 1.5 million American deaths during service in war time mean nothing? Must we do it all over again? Historical Alzheimers? Must we go out of our way to prove George Santayana correct anew?
“Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
Communism and Socialism have been tried numerous times in numerous — dozens — of countries in the past two centuries. It always fails. And every new dictator thinks that, in the past, it simply wasn’t “done right.” As I wrote, they believe they are the ones who can “do it right” this time. Then they fail and kill hundreds if not thousands if not millions of their own countrymen.
If there is one lesson the communist century should have taught, it is that the independent authority of universal moral principles cannot be an afterthought, since it is the conviction on which all of civilization depends.
Featuring Right thinking from a left brain, doing the job the American Media Maggots won’t, embracing ubiquitous, sagacious perspicacity and broadcasting behind enemy lines in Occupied Fornicalia from the veritable Belly of the Beast, the Bill Mill in Sacramento, Fornicalia, I continue to proffer my thanks to the SHR Media Network for allowing me to utilize their studio and hijack their air twice weekly, Tuesdays and Thursday nights, thanks to my shameless contract — as well as appear on the Sack Heads: Against Tyranny Show every Wednesday night.
Hour 1: BZ spoke to The Exceptional Conservative himself, KEN McCLENTON of TECN TV. We talked about radio, video, putting together radio broadcasts, Ken’s staff, and his having attended the DC rally “Demand Free Speech” on July 6th! No, Ken wasn’t there to serve the drinks; he was instead invited to speak at the DC event with Laura Loomer, Milo Yiannopoulos and more. We discovered that Ken was also banned from Twitter for two-and-a-half years. “If you haven’t been banned and you’re a Conservative you’re not doing it right!” Ken said.
Hour 2: BZ continued to speak with KEN McCLENTON, then we transitioned to the Ron Edwards Notebook, and thence into phone calls. And from there into regret over going digital. It will be the downfall of civilization. And much more. Give a listen.
As most people of a Conservative bent already know — it’s certainly no secret — the social media giants love Leftists because they are Leftists. They are the first to quash the accounts of Conservatives whilst tolerating the same precise activity by Leftists. The hypocrisy is unabashed, obvious, clear, flaunted and entirely unacknowledged by the social media giants themselves. With one slight adjunct exception. Later.
Then this from 
First, from the 
Freedom of speech “important”? Nah.