The Media's Reaction Over the Democrat Staffer's Romp vs. Boebert's Grope Tells You Which Side They're On
You might have forgotten about it, mostly because it was worth forgetting about, but back in September, Colorado Congresswoman Lauren Boebert walked into a theater with her new boyfriend and proceeded to get a breast exam after the start of the show.
You may recall that there was a full media meltdown over it all with the alphabet networks clutching every pearl they had over Boebert's gross behavior and every leftist talking head using it as a way to show that the Christian right was full of it whenever they beat their chest over their supposed righteousness.
My take? Boebert shouldn't have done that in a public theater, especially as a sitting congresswoman...but he who hath not got a little dangerous in a theater of some sort cast the first stone. It was unclear if she and her man were disturbing anyone, and I'm still not sure why there was a camera focused on her in the first place. Even though she shouldn't be getting risque around others, it was hard for me to get too mad about it.
You can see me talk more about it in the video below, along with additional context that made me feel less than willing to play along with the media's supposed outrage.
Besides Boebert's bodacious bodice being ballyhooed, the media believed that it had some sort of moral ground to stand on while it trumpeted its anger over Boebert's behavior. This is the same media that defended drag queens cursing and gyrating their partially exposed parts in front of children. Compared to what the left gets up to during a run-of-the-mill pride march, the groping of Boebert looks downright tame.
Then, one fateful day, America logged onto X to see some dude entering through the rear exit amid a Senate hearing chamber, and I'm not talking about any of the doors. Two gay men were getting it on in a place where Senators screw America all the time, but they weren't elected to do it so it's not allowed.
What was the media's reaction to something so grotesque happening inside our nation's capitol?
As Nick Arama noted on Saturday, it was to make it about how those dastardly pouncing Republicans getting worked up about an "alleged" rearing in the hearing chamber:
But then suddenly the story is "alleged by conservative outlets," according to their headline. The visuals were hardly "alleged"; they were pretty hard to miss. Did they not read his statement? They have it in the article. He says people are attacking him "for who I love." He didn't even have in there, "I didn't do it." It was pretty shocking and big news. The facts should immediately have had the liberal media jumping on it too. Except they didn't. They didn't even jump after he issued a statement on the matter. But if Cardin parted ways with the guy, do they truly think it's "alleged?" Cardin's office didn't seem to think so.
So let me get this straight. According to the American corporate media, Boebert's boob being grabbed in a dark theater is worth America's scorn but two dudes getting it on in a place we've been told is holier than holy since January 6 is just an example of how conservative media jumps on the attack?
Gee, it's almost like the media doesn't like conservatives and is practicing an extreme form of bias every time they use their platforms to report "news."
Allow me to repeat myself about this subject again:
The media is not your friend anymore. It is a business with a vested interest in making you watch, and it will play on your prejudices, fears, biases, and more in order to make that happen. These journalists are activists and will utilize the same in order to push their biases and opinions on you.
We, as a society, need to move forward under the knowledge that journalists, writers, and anchors (including myself), currently live in an age where we are at war, not with swords or guns, but with ideas. Most, if not all reporting today, is done with this war in mind. However, it’s not likely that this war will ever truly end, at least not while the media exists in this form. It’s likely that technology will have to advance further and the method by which news is delivered will have to change. What that will look like, I’m not sure.
But the takeaway here is that we must break from the old sentiment that the person delivering the news to you and your family in the comfort of your living rooms is a friend. He’s not. He’s a salesman trying to get you to buy a number of things all at once. He doesn’t know you and you likely will never meet him. He doesn’t care about you, your community, or what might trouble it. He cares about how your troubles might boost his ratings. If he can, he’ll exacerbate your community’s troubles in order to profit off it. Your community may burn, your life may be ruined, and all the focus he gave you one week may disappear the next.
The corporate media plays for one side, and you're not on it.
Post a Comment