> They made a point to drop that terrifying B-bomb in the title, sending shivers up the spine of many a HN reader.
I chuckled at this.
I think your analysis of their rhetoric is apt.
That said, the lede of the article is the media campaign pushing the pay-to-play narrative, not the righteousness of SpaceX (which is expected to be taken as a given).
Overall, the article was informative because I wouldn't have known that there was a counter argument to Sen. Paul's narrative.
I chuckled at this.
I think your analysis of their rhetoric is apt.
That said, the lede of the article is the media campaign pushing the pay-to-play narrative, not the righteousness of SpaceX (which is expected to be taken as a given).
Overall, the article was informative because I wouldn't have known that there was a counter argument to Sen. Paul's narrative.