I'm glad it's that simple for you. For the rest of us though, a platform as big and relevant as Twitter is a kind of town square, quite different from a forum for Apple enthusiasts. Being censored for political views on Twitter where a) basically everyone is, and b) there was a good faith expectation that the rules were politically neutral, is different.
Just because a company can write something into its terms of service and act according to those rules, doesn't mean the rules themselves are beyond scrutiny. Although this position of "well it's within their rights to do so" is often used when one wants to avoid the morality debate.
Censoring mean words on the internet might mean less mean words, temporarily at least. But you can't ignore the technical issue, which is that if you determine that "hate speech" is grounds for censorship, you need people to be deciding what hate speech is and who gets censored for it and when. Are you good enough to decide for the rest of us what we get to think and say? I'm not, and I don't think you are either.