It seemed like "high-tech" in 1991, although it doesn't by today's standards. I treat all questions I'm asked on the Bulwark as honest ones, so I assume that you must be questioning the adjective; the truth of the noun has been self-evident for 32 years.
I think the truth of the noun is very much in dispute. Much like claims of "martyrdom", people claiming such status for themselves never seem to suffer the actual consequence.
He was whining! Self-justifying! Felt nobody should question him! Kinda like Kavanaugh and his beer and bad behavior -- remember his crocodile tears during that hearing? "Anyone who won't give me what I want is a high-tech lynchmob" mentality.
It seemed like "high-tech" in 1991, although it doesn't by today's standards. I treat all questions I'm asked on the Bulwark as honest ones, so I assume that you must be questioning the adjective; the truth of the noun has been self-evident for 32 years.
I think the truth of the noun is very much in dispute. Much like claims of "martyrdom", people claiming such status for themselves never seem to suffer the actual consequence.
"That", as my father used to say, "is why there's chocolate and vanilla." Enjoy your day.
Im still at a loss for how the idea that Thomas was “lynched” is self-evident 22 [sic] years later.
He was whining! Self-justifying! Felt nobody should question him! Kinda like Kavanaugh and his beer and bad behavior -- remember his crocodile tears during that hearing? "Anyone who won't give me what I want is a high-tech lynchmob" mentality.
Good catch. 32 -- thanks. Corrected.