If you really think that the fact that Breaking Points is taking money from and associating w/ billionaires and Neocons isn't a conflict of interest at the minimum, or that Saagar isn't towing the Establishment line on China while Krystal won't push back on it, you're a fucking moron.
If you really think that the fact that Breaking Points is taking money from and associating w/ billionaires and Neocons isn't a conflict of interest at the minimum, or that Saagar isn't towing the Establishment line on China while Krystal won't push back on it, you're a fucking moron.
"Neocons isn't a conflict of interest at the minimum, or that Saagar isn't towing the Establishment line on China while Krystal won't push back on it."
This shows you are still stuck in some kind of false reality where you equate being anti-China with neocons. Yes neocons are anti-China, and so is the entire democrat party including the squad and Ilhan Omar and AOC, and also left media outlets like Democracy Now, Jacobin, Majority Report, etc.
Krystal doesn't push back on anti-China rhetoric not because she supports neocons, but because she covers for the squad. Ultimately that is the Krystal Ball /David Sirota/ Ryan Grim / Democracy Now / TYT/ Majority Report/ Abby Martin/ niche. They will give a symbolic token of adversarialism once in a blue moon to remain credible with their base of left-wing democrat-socialists, but they will always fall back in line when it matters. They will also attack real leftists the moment they step out of line or when the DNC sees them as a threat. I could give example after example.
Funny how in this entire screed, you didn't mention Saagar or his anti-China rhetoric. Maybe because you realized your argument would fall apart if you mentioned him. You're still trying to run interference for Breaking Points' anti-China hawkery.
I checked to see if you ever responded, but now i think i realize that you confused me with the previous commenter. That would explain why i was so baffled by your response anyway.
You've done nothing but complain that we shouldn't criticize Breaking Points because you like their content, and now you're actually agreeing w/ the criticism we're levying against Breaking Points. You literally contradicted yourself and didn't even realize it.
If you really think that the fact that Breaking Points is taking money from and associating w/ billionaires and Neocons isn't a conflict of interest at the minimum, or that Saagar isn't towing the Establishment line on China while Krystal won't push back on it, you're a fucking moron.
Notice the frame here:
"Neocons isn't a conflict of interest at the minimum, or that Saagar isn't towing the Establishment line on China while Krystal won't push back on it."
This shows you are still stuck in some kind of false reality where you equate being anti-China with neocons. Yes neocons are anti-China, and so is the entire democrat party including the squad and Ilhan Omar and AOC, and also left media outlets like Democracy Now, Jacobin, Majority Report, etc.
Krystal doesn't push back on anti-China rhetoric not because she supports neocons, but because she covers for the squad. Ultimately that is the Krystal Ball /David Sirota/ Ryan Grim / Democracy Now / TYT/ Majority Report/ Abby Martin/ niche. They will give a symbolic token of adversarialism once in a blue moon to remain credible with their base of left-wing democrat-socialists, but they will always fall back in line when it matters. They will also attack real leftists the moment they step out of line or when the DNC sees them as a threat. I could give example after example.
Funny how in this entire screed, you didn't mention Saagar or his anti-China rhetoric. Maybe because you realized your argument would fall apart if you mentioned him. You're still trying to run interference for Breaking Points' anti-China hawkery.
Also, why the fuck did you include Abby Martin?
I checked to see if you ever responded, but now i think i realize that you confused me with the previous commenter. That would explain why i was so baffled by your response anyway.
i don't even know how to respond to this. If you have a learning disability or something, it's fine, no shame; just let me know.
You've done nothing but complain that we shouldn't criticize Breaking Points because you like their content, and now you're actually agreeing w/ the criticism we're levying against Breaking Points. You literally contradicted yourself and didn't even realize it.