The Democrats who fear free speech

 Washington Examiner:

On one side is a self-made immigrant billionaire who has dedicated his life to fighting climate change. On the other are BlackRock, Saudi Arabia, and Jeff Bezos.

Democrats and their paid mouthpieces in the media have chosen to side with the latter.

Elon Musk’s hostile takeover of Twitter has been called “dangerous for our democracy” by Sen. Elizabeth Warren. Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley says it is “a concern when an oligarch may be owning the town square." The Bezos-owned Washington Post seemed to blame Musk when unnamed accounts launched "racist" attacks on Twitter’s legal, policy, and trust leader, Vijaya Gadde, for her involvement in suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop story before the 2020 election.

The question isn’t why liberals so fear Musk, the brains behind the most successful electric car company in history. It’s why they don’t fear those whom Musk is displacing — namely, the worst people in all of woke corporatism.

Sure, Tesla’s large Chinese market may make Musk a little too friendly toward the adversary of the Western world. Does that make him more risky than asset managers BlackRock or Vanguard, both top Twitter investors with unhealthy sympathies for Chinese expansion? Twitter under Musk would certainly have a long way to go to match the Washington Post’s Sino-sycophancy under Bezos. Despite the Amazon founder’s public fulminating over Musk’s China ties, the Post has taken millions to print a propaganda insert for the Chinese Communist Party.

Another point: Musk wants everyone to be able to own a car that produces no carbon emissions and does not contribute to traffic through his scientific pursuits at the Boring Company. BlackRock, which is buying homes for upwards of 20% asking prices in cash, evidently wants nobody to own anything.

Top Twitter owner Saudi Prince Al Waleed bin Talal publicly aired his opposition to Musk buying the brand before he brokered his successful deal. Sure, the Democratic president may have to cozy up to enlightened despots like Mohammed bin Salman in the hopes of isolating adversaries such as Russia and China, but the rest of his party doesn’t have to. Yet MBS’s billionaire cousin earned none of the scorn that Musk did for his failed attempts to block the bid.

...

There is more.

The blocking of the Hunter laptop story was a mistake and it is not racist to hold whoever did it responsible for that egregious mistake.  We are now living through the consequences of that mistake with all the disasters of the Biden administration.  While that person has not been fired, yet, the poor judgment shown in blocking relevant information about the Biden family corruption should be a firing offense.

The Democrats oppose Musk's purchase because they like the blocking of information that puts them and their candidates in a bad light.  They like the fact that they can spew disinformation about Russian collusion while blocking negative information against their candidates and policies.  They are providing more evidence of their inner despotic tendencies.

See, also:

These are the banned Twitter accounts conservatives want Elon Musk to bring back

And: 

MSNBC host tries fear-mongering viewers about potential for leftists to be silenced

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t...
Read more

Is the F-35 obsolete?

Headline USA: Pentagon Fires Back after Musk Calls Its Most Expensive Project ‘Obsolete’ 'Yeah, as I'm sure you can appreciate, Mr. Musk is, currently, a private citizen, I'm not going to make any comments about what a private citizen may have to say about the F-35....'   ... ... Drones appear to be replacing jets for many operations.  The Russia-Ukraine war is an example of that.  Drones are often hard to detect and can be used for intelligence operations as well as for attacking enemy targets.  It would not surprise me to see drones engaging other drones in combat.  They also cost much less than manned fighters.  
Read more