Jump to content


Censorship


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Archy1221 said:

I actually did ask you and you graciously gave your answer.  
 

unfortunate you feel that way.  We shall agree to disagree then. 

I'm good with that, but just so we're clear, I'm not necessarily happy about inequality in any case.  Unfortunately it's a reality we have to live with in many facets of our lives.  But sometimes, all things considered, it's the best option.  That's why I feel Trump getting the boot was the right call.  Sure, one could go down the list and name a bunch of other A-holes who should be banned too and you'd be right.  

 

I guess, I'm more of a "big picture" kind of guy on things like this.  

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

11 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

OH sure.  So self-described D-list celebrities are permitted to encourage violence. At which list does that stop being permissible?


When did I say she was permitted? I said who would actually go commit violence because Kathy Griffin told them to?

Link to comment
12 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Is it your position that Twitter terms of service should be different based on job title when it comes to calls for violence 


Twitter can do what it wants, I dont give a damn. Im saying its far more likely that someone will actually commit violence if DT tells them to as opposed to KG. 

Link to comment
11 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

All of the enemies of freedom are hypocrites and liars.  That's a given.  They don't have standards beyond their perceived immediate advantage.  But they don't respect other people.  The only way to get more fair treatment is to force them.  We just have to wait a while until the Rs are back in power.  The Ds really don't want their to be free speech, they invented the phrase "safe space."


Please for the love of God learn what the first amendement protects you from. And then seek help. 

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment
14 minutes ago, Frott Scost said:


Twitter can do what it wants, I dont give a damn. Im saying its far more likely that someone will actually commit violence if DT tells them to as opposed to KG. 

It’s possible that is true.  Doesn’t change the fact that terms of service for inciting violence should be same across the board.  
 

Hopefully the Dems will do a much better job about regulating the social media companies than then Republicans did.  Possibly break them up into components like the old Bell’s. 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

22 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

It’s possible that is true.  Doesn’t change the fact that terms of service for inciting violence should be same across the board.  
 

Hopefully the Dems will do a much better job about regulating the social media companies than then Republicans did.  Possibly break them up into components like the old Bell’s. 


Isnt that communism? Government control over private companies and breaking apart their companies.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
8 hours ago, Frott Scost said:


When did I say she was permitted? I said who would actually go commit violence because Kathy Griffin told them to?

You people think maga supporters committed violence when Trump did nottell them to.

 

But several celebrities extolled violence against Trump and you say its okay because no one would ever do it.

 

I can't find your logic, there probably isn't any to find. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
51 minutes ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

You people think maga supporters committed violence when Trump did nottell them to.

 

 

 they wound that crowd into a frenzy and then told them to go to the capitol.    if barack and the clintons had done the same exact thing with their followers you would have been calling for tanks in the streets and public executions.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

45 minutes ago, commando said:

 they wound that crowd into a frenzy and then told them to go to the capitol.    if barack and the clintons had done the same exact thing with their followers you would have been calling for tanks in the streets and public executions.

Probably best to let him speak for himself on what he would call for.  

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
Just now, Archy1221 said:

Probably best to let him speak for himself on what he would call for.  

NDJoe has been here a long time.   i know him fairly well and i truely believe that is exactly how he would react.    he can deny it if he wants....but that would go against his instincts to blame demoncrats for everything evil in the world.  

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment
2 hours ago, commando said:

 they wound that crowd into a frenzy and then told them to go to the capitol.    if barack and the clintons had done the same exact thing with their followers you would have been calling for tanks in the streets and public executions.

Ds have already said much worse.  I betcha can't find a post where I called for anything other than the drunk tank.

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

Ds have already said much worse.  I betcha can't find a post where I called for anything other than the drunk tank.

kk...i really do doubt that if it had happened that way you would not be calling it sedition....but ok.   

Link to comment
×
×
  • Create New...