Did you notice the nearly imperceptible 9/11 Google Tribute?

[Asclepias]

Why should they be stopped? Are you a snowflake? No one is forcing you to use Google. You can use Bing or any of the other search engines. I thought you clowns were for less government intervention not more?

Pft. Old fogie republicans following the party line about 'muh free market capitalism' helped get us into this situation where ultra mega multinational corporations are growing more powerful than the federal government. Just because you *think* they're on your political side today doesn't mean it will always stay that way.

Why would I think repubs were on my side? Most of them are racists.

I'm talking about the corporations, dummy

Why would I think the corporations were on my side white dummy?

 

[impuretrash]

Why would I think the corporations were on my side white dummy?

You're defending google for some reason.

 

[Asclepias]

Why would I think the corporations were on my side white dummy?

You're defending google for some reason.

You sound booty tickled. What does me defending google have to do with thinking they are on my side?

 

[impuretrash]

Why would I think the corporations were on my side white dummy?

You're defending google for some reason.

You sound booty tickled. What does me defending google have to do with thinking they are on my side?

*shrug* Obviously you're still smarting from having your black supremacist delusions smashed to bits and can't have a discussion with me on any other topic.

 

[beagle9]

Why did you ignore the context he gave for his comment?

Oh, that's right, you are a libtard.

Just a guess, but probably because the "context" for comment is asinine.

Google is not under any obligation to care about what you think they should care about, and whining about it just makes you look like a "snowflake".

If Google's failure to fetishize the tragedy of 16 years ago upsets you, you are free to use Bing, or another search engine.

. Google should be broken up if they are found to be abusing their power, and pushing political agenda's with that power.

Why?

Just because you're butthurt about their choice of Google doodle?

. If found to be pushing heavily a political agenda that leans over into an unbalanced way, then they should be stopped. They should provide a service for all, and stay neutral in the market place always. To become a political arm of the Demon-crats or the repugnacrats should just turn their customer base stomachs.

So you're proposing some sort of "fairness doctrine" for the internet?

Does this apply to all websites, or just the ones that upset you? What branch of the government should be in charge of making sure websites are "fair" enough for you? What should the penalties be for violating it?

. A fairness doctrine eh ?? Hmm, well as long as it's based upon some agreed upon standards or principles by vote of, then why not ?? If the standards or principles set are violated, then yes fines or punishment should ensue. I mean our very government and nation abides by a Constitution, so what's wrong with a internet Constitution being written, agreed upon, and abide by as well for the nation ??

 

[beagle9]

Why should they be stopped? Are you a snowflake? No one is forcing you to use Google. You can use Bing or any of the other search engines. I thought you clowns were for less government intervention not more?

Pft. Old fogie republicans following the party line about 'muh free market capitalism' helped get us into this situation where ultra mega multinational corporations are growing more powerful than the federal government. Just because you *think* they're on your political side today doesn't mean it will always stay that way.

Why would I think repubs were on my side? Most of them are racists.

. How can you be objective while being such a racist ?

 

[Asclepias]

Why would I think the corporations were on my side white dummy?

You're defending google for some reason.

You sound booty tickled. What does me defending google have to do with thinking they are on my side?

*shrug* Obviously you're still smarting from having your black supremacist delusions smashed to bits and can't have a discussion with me on any other topic.

When did this happen? Are you going off topic in frustration on a political thread? Should I report you?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Just a guess, but probably because the "context" for comment is asinine.

Google is not under any obligation to care about what you think they should care about, and whining about it just makes you look like a "snowflake".

If Google's failure to fetishize the tragedy of 16 years ago upsets you, you are free to use Bing, or another search engine.

. Google should be broken up if they are found to be abusing their power, and pushing political agenda's with that power.

Why?

Just because you're butthurt about their choice of Google doodle?

. If found to be pushing heavily a political agenda that leans over into an unbalanced way, then they should be stopped. They should provide a service for all, and stay neutral in the market place always. To become a political arm of the Demon-crats or the repugnacrats should just turn their customer base stomachs.

So you're proposing some sort of "fairness doctrine" for the internet?

Does this apply to all websites, or just the ones that upset you? What branch of the government should be in charge of making sure websites are "fair" enough for you? What should the penalties be for violating it?

. A fairness doctrine eh ?? Hmm, well as long as it's based upon some agreed upon standards or principles by vote of, then why not ?? If the standards or principles set are violated, then yes fines or punishment should ensue. I mean our very government and nation abides by a Constitution, so what's wrong with a internet Constitution being written, agreed upon, and abide by as well for the nation ??

Yes, our nation does abide by a Constitution - one that enshrines the concept of "free speech".

As in, that includes speech that you don't like.

 

[Asclepias]

Why should they be stopped? Are you a snowflake? No one is forcing you to use Google. You can use Bing or any of the other search engines. I thought you clowns were for less government intervention not more?

Pft. Old fogie republicans following the party line about 'muh free market capitalism' helped get us into this situation where ultra mega multinational corporations are growing more powerful than the federal government. Just because you *think* they're on your political side today doesn't mean it will always stay that way.

Why would I think repubs were on my side? Most of them are racists.

. How can you be objective while being such a racist ?

Easily. Repubs are Black, white, asian, hispanic, etc etc.

 

[beagle9]

. Google should be broken up if they are found to be abusing their power, and pushing political agenda's with that power.

Why?

Just because you're butthurt about their choice of Google doodle?

. If found to be pushing heavily a political agenda that leans over into an unbalanced way, then they should be stopped. They should provide a service for all, and stay neutral in the market place always. To become a political arm of the Demon-crats or the repugnacrats should just turn their customer base stomachs.

So you're proposing some sort of "fairness doctrine" for the internet?

Does this apply to all websites, or just the ones that upset you? What branch of the government should be in charge of making sure websites are "fair" enough for you? What should the penalties be for violating it?

. A fairness doctrine eh ?? Hmm, well as long as it's based upon some agreed upon standards or principles by vote of, then why not ?? If the standards or principles set are violated, then yes fines or punishment should ensue. I mean our very government and nation abides by a Constitution, so what's wrong with a internet Constitution being written, agreed upon, and abide by as well for the nation ??

Yes, our nation does abide by a Constitution - one that enshrines the concept of "free speech".

As in, that includes speech that you don't like.

. If you think speech of any kind is supported and legal per the Constitutional 1st amendment, then you are delusional... Antifa is finding this out now. You can't yell fire in a crowded theater, and then site your 1st admendment right to do so. Speech has consequences, so yes you can speak it, but you might find that you weren't right in doing so or you have to be right when doing so. Of course nothing is a hammer to steal, so the give and forgiveness in it all is what keeps wars from happening, and peace within. Violence is never exceptable.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Why?

Just because you're butthurt about their choice of Google doodle?

. If found to be pushing heavily a political agenda that leans over into an unbalanced way, then they should be stopped. They should provide a service for all, and stay neutral in the market place always. To become a political arm of the Demon-crats or the repugnacrats should just turn their customer base stomachs.

So you're proposing some sort of "fairness doctrine" for the internet?

Does this apply to all websites, or just the ones that upset you? What branch of the government should be in charge of making sure websites are "fair" enough for you? What should the penalties be for violating it?

. A fairness doctrine eh ?? Hmm, well as long as it's based upon some agreed upon standards or principles by vote of, then why not ?? If the standards or principles set are violated, then yes fines or punishment should ensue. I mean our very government and nation abides by a Constitution, so what's wrong with a internet Constitution being written, agreed upon, and abide by as well for the nation ??

Yes, our nation does abide by a Constitution - one that enshrines the concept of "free speech".

As in, that includes speech that you don't like.

. If you think speech of any kind is supported and legal per the Constitutional 1st amendment, then you are delusional... Antifa is finding this out now.

That's quite a strawman you've managed to knock down.

 

[impuretrash]

If you think speech of any kind is supported and legal per the Constitutional 1st amendment, then you are delusional... Antifa is finding this out now.

What are you trying to say?

 

[BlueGin]

Did you notice the nearly imperceptible 9/11 Google Tribute?

Why no, as a matter of fact I did not. You see, when I use Google it's to search for something, not to go find something to bring to a message board to piss and moan about due to having no life.

Imagine that -- using something for what it's designed for instead of for a whine source.

Actually I never see the Google page -- I just type the search terms in the address bar. It's automatic. Welcome to the 1990s.

I never use google.

 

[beagle9]

If you think speech of any kind is supported and legal per the Constitutional 1st amendment, then you are delusional... Antifa is finding this out now.

What are you trying to say?

. I'm saying speech has consequences, but many don't think it does these days. You can't say anything you might want to say without consequences, and it's those consequences that keep people somewhat living peaceful lives with one another.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

If you think speech of any kind is supported and legal per the Constitutional 1st amendment, then you are delusional... Antifa is finding this out now.

What are you trying to say?

. I'm saying speech has consequences, but many don't think it does these days. You can't say anything you might want to say without consequences, and it's those consequences that keep people somewhat living peaceful lives with one another.

Of course speech has consequences. You are welcome to boycott Google, if you don't like their speech.

But aside from a few very specific exceptions, the government doesn't dole out "consequences" for speech - and that is the whole point of the 1st.

 

[impuretrash]

If you think speech of any kind is supported and legal per the Constitutional 1st amendment, then you are delusional... Antifa is finding this out now.

What are you trying to say?

. I'm saying speech has consequences, but many don't think it does these days. You can't say anything you might want to say without consequences, and it's those consequences that keep people somewhat living peaceful lives with one another.

Yeah that's complete bullshit but ok. the thing about Antifa is what has me confused. What lesson are they learning? Has there been a crackdown on them that I haven't heard of? Since when is macing old ladies in the face considered a protected form of speech?

 

[beagle9]

If you think speech of any kind is supported and legal per the Constitutional 1st amendment, then you are delusional... Antifa is finding this out now.

What are you trying to say?

. I'm saying speech has consequences, but many don't think it does these days. You can't say anything you might want to say without consequences, and it's those consequences that keep people somewhat living peaceful lives with one another.

Of course speech has consequences. You are welcome to boycott Google, if you don't like their speech.

But aside from a few very specific exceptions, the government doesn't dole out "consequences" for speech - and that is the whole point of the 1st.

. If the law arrest you for getting out of line in a free speech rally, and that means because you were making threats to law enforcement, a president, his family etc. Then the government does give out the punishment in that situation. Many more senarios fit the bill as well.

 

[beagle9]

If you think speech of any kind is supported and legal per the Constitutional 1st amendment, then you are delusional... Antifa is finding this out now.

What are you trying to say?

. I'm saying speech has consequences, but many don't think it does these days. You can't say anything you might want to say without consequences, and it's those consequences that keep people somewhat living peaceful lives with one another.

Yeah that's complete bullshit but ok. the thing about Antifa is what has me confused. What lesson are they learning? Has there been a crackdown on them that I haven't heard of? Since when is macing old ladies in the face considered a protected form of speech?

. I agree, but there day is coming. I thought a crack down was already in the pipe line ?

 

[impuretrash]

I agree, but there day is coming. I thought a crack down was already in the pipe line ?

Your entire premise is wrong start to finish. Antifa going around roughing up people for wearing maga caps is not free speech, it's terrorism. And civil society is done a great disservice when people are afraid to tell the truth, just ask the rotherham rape victims.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Google doesn't have any sort of "monopoly".