>> I did not watch your video.
Well, then I'm wasting my time. That is what my comments were on. It was the only relevant, objective information available.
>> I treated "establishment" and "liberal bias" as the same thing. You have ingrained that new view in me. You call the GOP establishment liberal. The reality based GOP, which is never-Trump, to you is liberal, no longer conservative. You call even Brumar liberal. And Over the last few years I have come to equate the positions and attitudes of 1) establishment, 2) reality-based, and 3) RINO. Sanger was clearly viewing things from your angle. Thus, the liberal bias he spoke of is the same as establishment perspective.
Okay, this is so convoluted and confused I am unable to process it.
But to cut to the chase, Sanger -- in the interview I posted -- was as objective as a human can possibly be. He clearly is disappointed that his work product has been corrupted by liberals, and he is not happy about that. Not that it was liberals who did it, but that Wikipedia is corrupted at all. Because he realizes that it destroys the value of the platform.
I cannot imagine a more objective analysis of the issue.
As to Brumer, I remember his posts from 20 years back, ten years back, and he was far too extreme RIGHT for me most of the time. But we had common political views in some areas. His flip is astounding, and while I've not tried to catalog his transition it might be interesting to do so. For a while I thought he must have been kidnapped.
He is, today, extremely liberal. Anyone who could support what Biden is doing is off the rails leftist. I cannot imagine how any moderate or conservative could support him. |
