Sure, it's right before the Antifa chapter meeting at the bingo hall.

One side says the border isn't a problem when it observably is and that inflation is under control when it is not.

The other side tells you that American cities are a "war zone" and that immigrants are eating dogs and cats off the street.

Both of these are the same. /eyeroll

This is fair, to an extent, but the "one side is far worse than the other" is an acknowledgment that many people stop far short of.

No, we're at the "prove it" stage.

Sure, it's fair and accurate to characterize the response to those issues by "the left" as such, but I was talking about "the press" which did no such thing. If your point was to dispel the myth of the "liberal media", you did a pretty tidy job of it.

That's because "both sides are bad" is an escape hatch that gets one out of the uncomfortable position of having to critically evaluate the two.

Political parties have become tribes, and now at least half of the country has lost the capacity for being critical of their own. I don't see how this gets reconciled peacefully, let alone amicably.

No actual mainstream press outlet has taken any of those positions, so as usual, you're just making things up so you have something to be angry about.

Fox News started this idea that political reporting always needs to treat both sides of an issue as equally valid, regardless of how closely either side adheres to facts and and good-faith arguments.

"Fair and Balanced" as it has become would demand equal time for Jews and Nazis in a piece about the Holocaust.

Good advice for the people who get triggered over trigger warnings.

If it doesn't apply to you, it's not about you, and it's certainly not threatening you. Just get over yourself.

What could you possibly imagine a warning at the beginning of a video is demanding of you?

It sounds like you need a trigger warning for trigger warnings.

At least it gives you something important to get up on your soapbox over.

Version 7 of PowerShell isn't going anywhere.

What does nimbyism have to do with anything here?

The claim would be it's primarily NIMBY folks who prevent more construction and in more places, leading to landlords having more power and ability to make renters jump through such hoops.

If only it was that simple.

They still have assets in the state in question, which means they are very much reachable.