do dems believe the censoring of conservative speech by social media giants is ok ?

[yidnar]

i noticed that dems remain silent on the censorship being placed on conservatives by social networks ..... do they agree with censorship.

The left wing of this nation's politics has grown up on the idea that only their viewpoints have merit and are worth fighting for even if that means unequal treatment. This is stock-in-trade progressive thinking. If you defend your viewpoint you're immoral because your viewpoint is wrong...if they cheat to advance their viewpoint that is not immoral because their viewpoint is correct.....you cannot penetrate this kind of obtuseness.

" The left wing of this nation's politics has grown up on the idea that only their viewpoints have merit and are worth fighting for even if that means unequal treatment. This is stock-in-trade progressive thinking. If you defend your viewpoint you're immoral because your viewpoint is wrong...if they cheat to advance their viewpoint that is not immoral because their viewpoint is correct.....you cannot penetrate this kind of obtuseness. "


you just described trump
limbaugh
steve bannon
breitbart
pjmedia
the blaze
hate radio
mitch mcconnell
every evangelical in the country
the oath keepers


" The right wing of this nation's politics has grown up on the idea that only their viewpoints have merit and are worth fighting for even if that means unequal treatment. This is stock-in-trade conservative thinking. If you defend your viewpoint you're immoral because your viewpoint is wrong...if they cheat to advance their viewpoint that is not immoral because their viewpoint is correct.....you cannot penetrate this kind of obtuseness. "

I'm sure that fantasy makes you feel better, but conservatives support the freedom of speech.

Leftists don't. Period. End of story.

right ! just look at how conservative speech is treated on college campuses !

 

[candycorn]

To quote a leftist icon:

"What difference does it make?"

-- Hillary Clinton

Some of us aren't so casual about the truth. Clearly you are.

But I've decided the Trump/Russia collusion story is misinformation. So it is.

You know, like you do with conservative ideas.

You're a poster on a message board. Like I am.

A report by the US Senate carries a bit more heft.

But if you choose to believe an alternate version of reality....you've been doing it for five years. You probably have forgotten what truth is.

Thing is, I used to be a liberal. Never thought much about politics, just always voted Democrat.

Then I started paying attention. And the more I paid attention, the more conservative I found myself becoming.

Can you say that? Have you ever changed your beliefs?

Who was the last Democrat you voted for?

I used to hate the Electoral college. I don’t any more. I used to be firmly in Israel’s camp. Not any more.

Bill Clinton.

Now you're going to tell me I wasn't a real liberal Democrat.

Doubtful since Clinton was not all that liberal himself. So you haven't voted for a Democrat in this century. Cool.

 

[candycorn]

To quote a leftist icon:

"What difference does it make?"

-- Hillary Clinton

Some of us aren't so casual about the truth. Clearly you are.

But I've decided the Trump/Russia collusion story is misinformation. So it is.

You know, like you do with conservative ideas.

You're a poster on a message board. Like I am.

A report by the US Senate carries a bit more heft.

But if you choose to believe an alternate version of reality....you've been doing it for five years. You probably have forgotten what truth is.

Thing is, I used to be a liberal. Never thought much about politics, just always voted Democrat.

Then I started paying attention. And the more I paid attention, the more conservative I found myself becoming.

Can you say that? Have you ever changed your beliefs?

Any documented disagreement with the blob on a major topic?

I assume you're childishly referring to President Trump. Could you, like, grow up, maybe? You'll understand if I don't hold my breath.

"Documented"?

I'm not going through my posts to give you links.

Put another way, you've never disagreed with the blob on a major topic. Ever. Good to know.

 

[candycorn]

i noticed that dems remain silent on the censorship being placed on conservatives by social networks ..... do they agree with censorship.

I notice that the platforms are censoring dis-information. If you don't want to be censored, stick to the truth and honesty.

I do think they are being a little too strict at times really. There was a video from the Trump campaign they supposedly banned. I saw it on one of the platforms with the banner saying (It was banned...). So I don't know but...if it was...I don't know why.

Who determines truth and honesty? You? Who should be appointed as the "Truth Police."

you have no problem with your candidate being hidden away from the media and given softball questions to win an election ! our democracy and freedom of information has been hijacked by totalitarian forces and you love it ! wheres hunter ?

I think there should be a picture gallery for people who lost bets and are gone. It would be tombstones with the date of their first post and the date of their last post. We'll put "Where's Hunter" on yours. You're the only one who cares.

Who told you that Hunter's crimes are unimportant?

They lied to you. And you lack the wit to question it.

What crimes are those?
What has he been indicted on?
What charge is he facing?

Who's Hunter, anyway? He's never mentioned on social media.

You brought up his "crimes"....Please elaborate...

Can't. I'm not allowed to see any information about him.

So there are no crimes. Great. Makes one wonder why you alleged there were.

Oh well, another lie from a Trumper....LOL...that almost never happens <sarcasm>

And there it is, folks -- if it's not Officially Approved Leftist Social Media opinion, candycorn doesn't accept it.

I just asked you about the crimes. You’ve reported no arrests, indictments etc....
THERE it is. Womp

They're listed right next to Trump's crimes.

Still waiting for Hunter's crimes. Since you can't list any...we'll just say he's committed none of them.

Thanks.

 

[candycorn]

I think it’s responsible to censor the

Of course, you do. But when you say, “habitual disseminators of misinformation”, every sane person reading your bullshit knows that what you really mean by that is people who are expressing legitimate opinions, and even hard, provable truths, that you do not like.

And what this really proves about you, is that you know taht you are completely full of shit, to the point that you have no hope of ever winning any argument legitimately and honestly, that you can only “win”, by cheating, by suppressing and censoring your opposition.

It proves that you are an intellectually-dishonest, cowardly piece of shit, as that is the only kind of subhuman who benefits from the sort of censorship that you openly and shamelessly defend.

You can't even use profanity effectively.

View attachment 417339

Trump was posting lies to sway the outcome of an election. Twitter let him but put a warning on the tweet.

I frankly think they should ban him as they did Bannon myself.

As for my winning an argument, I'm usually pretty good at winning because you guys are so unarmed. I mean...look at your post above...all personal attacks and not very cogent ones at at that.

You oppose freedom.

You automatically lose.

Banning someone from Twitter is opposing freedom? Make me laugh harder....

 

[Wyatt earp]

i noticed that dems remain silent on the censorship being placed on conservatives by social networks ..... do they agree with censorship.

I notice that the platforms are censoring dis-information. If you don't want to be censored, stick to the truth and honesty.

I do think they are being a little too strict at times really. There was a video from the Trump campaign they supposedly banned. I saw it on one of the platforms with the banner saying (It was banned...). So I don't know but...if it was...I don't know why.

Who determines truth and honesty? You? Who should be appointed as the "Truth Police."

you have no problem with your candidate being hidden away from the media and given softball questions to win an election ! our democracy and freedom of information has been hijacked by totalitarian forces and you love it ! wheres hunter ?

I think there should be a picture gallery for people who lost bets and are gone. It would be tombstones with the date of their first post and the date of their last post. We'll put "Where's Hunter" on yours. You're the only one who cares.

Who told you that Hunter's crimes are unimportant?

They lied to you. And you lack the wit to question it.

What crimes are those?
What has he been indicted on?
What charge is he facing?

Who's Hunter, anyway? He's never mentioned on social media.

You brought up his "crimes"....Please elaborate...

Can't. I'm not allowed to see any information about him.

So there are no crimes. Great. Makes one wonder why you alleged there were.

Oh well, another lie from a Trumper....LOL...that almost never happens <sarcasm>

And there it is, folks -- if it's not Officially Approved Leftist Social Media opinion, candycorn doesn't accept it.

I just asked you about the crimes. You’ve reported no arrests, indictments etc....
THERE it is. Womp

They're listed right next to Trump's crimes.

Still waiting for Hunter's crimes. Since you can't list any...we'll just say he's committed none of them.

Thanks.

Smoking crack?

 

[Roudy]

Yes, they gave up on American values and the constitution a long time ago.

 

[danielpalos]

...yes, whenever right wingers believe false witness bearing or the practice of the abomination of hypocrisy (with a McCarthy era phrase in our pledge) is ok.

 

[Skylar]

I think it’s responsible to censor the

Of course, you do. But when you say, “habitual disseminators of misinformation”, every sane person reading your bullshit knows that what you really mean by that is people who are expressing legitimate opinions, and even hard, provable truths, that you do not like.

And what this really proves about you, is that you know taht you are completely full of shit, to the point that you have no hope of ever winning any argument legitimately and honestly, that you can only “win”, by cheating, by suppressing and censoring your opposition.

It proves that you are an intellectually-dishonest, cowardly piece of shit, as that is the only kind of subhuman who benefits from the sort of censorship that you openly and shamelessly defend.

You can't even use profanity effectively.

View attachment 417339

Trump was posting lies to sway the outcome of an election. Twitter let him but put a warning on the tweet.

I frankly think they should ban him as they did Bannon myself.

As for my winning an argument, I'm usually pretty good at winning because you guys are so unarmed. I mean...look at your post above...all personal attacks and not very cogent ones at at that.

You oppose freedom.

You automatically lose.

Banning someone from Twitter is opposing freedom? Make me laugh harder....

Laughing.......those lamenting their 1st amendment rights haven't read so much as the first word of the 1st amendment.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

I think a private company serving whoever they want is their choice. Do you agree?

Soo, if your electricity provider decides that it doesn't want to sell you electricity, you're fine with them pulling the plug?

A trumper can't ever say shit to anyone about censoring....

You fragile minded cucks want to censor the legal votes of millions upon millions of voters -- especially those scary black voters....

 

[dblack]

Laughing.......those lamenting their 1st amendment rights haven't read so much as the first word of the 1st amendment.

It's the first five words that matter: "Congress shall make no law ..."

If only they'd stopped right there.

 

[Skylar]

I think it’s responsible to censor the

Of course, you do. But when you say, “habitual disseminators of misinformation”, every sane person reading your bullshit knows that what you really mean by that is people who are expressing legitimate opinions, and even hard, provable truths, that you do not like.

And what this really proves about you, is that you know taht you are completely full of shit, to the point that you have no hope of ever winning any argument legitimately and honestly, that you can only “win”, by cheating, by suppressing and censoring your opposition.

It proves that you are an intellectually-dishonest, cowardly piece of shit, as that is the only kind of subhuman who benefits from the sort of censorship that you openly and shamelessly defend.

You can't even use profanity effectively.

View attachment 417339

Trump was posting lies to sway the outcome of an election. Twitter let him but put a warning on the tweet.

I frankly think they should ban him as they did Bannon myself.

As for my winning an argument, I'm usually pretty good at winning because you guys are so unarmed. I mean...look at your post above...all personal attacks and not very cogent ones at at that.

You oppose freedom.

You automatically lose.

Banning someone from Twitter is opposing freedom? Make me laugh harder....

Laughing.......those lamenting their 1st amendment rights haven't read so much as the first word of the 1st amendment.

It's the first five words that matter: "Congress shall make no law ..."

If only they'd stopped right there.

You need go no farther than 'Congress' to see why whining about a Twitter fact checking policy has nothing to do with the 1st amendment.

 

[BlindBoo]

Awww don't feel so bad, you still have Right Wing Radio to get your Hate On.

What is is about the free press that you don't understand?

 

[dblack]

Awww don't feel so bad, you still have Right Wing Radio to get your Hate On.

What is is about the free press that you don't understand?

The part about where it doesn't have to serve as a propaganda conduit for the White House.

 

[BlindBoo]

Awww don't feel so bad, you still have Right Wing Radio to get your Hate On.

What is is about the free press that you don't understand?

The part about where it doesn't have to serve as a propaganda conduit for the White House.

Well it doesn't have to, but it is free to do so, or rather, they may find it more profitable to do so.

 

[daveman]

i noticed that dems remain silent on the censorship being placed on conservatives by social networks ..... do they agree with censorship.

Unfortunately, the law is on the side of Twitter and Facebook. The first amendment does not apply to private property. This is a Sup Ct ruling. What I suggest as a tactic to pressure the media is to boycott them. They survive on advertising revenue. If we the consumers don't read those ads, the media will lose money bigtime.

As an old man who has never gone to Facebook or Twitter, the poster's views seem sensible to me.

If people do not like those two platforms, why do they keep going there?

I, for example, do not like my hometown newspaper (because even its headlines are mini-editorials against President Trump), so I canceled my subscription last year. It fills me with pleasure to learn that other people have also dropped the paper (perhaps for other reasons) and that it is now in financial doo-doo.

i always enjoy destroying conservative businesses by boycotting them

i laugh at their humiliation as they lose everything.

Do you boycott them, or burn them down while wearing a black hoodie and mask?

 

[daveman]

Not at all. I don't know why you're refusing to get this.

The government would be dictating no terms. Publishers are subject to suit by individuals harmed by the publisher's material and the government's sole activity is deciding the case. If no one is harmed, no one files suit, and the government is uninvolved.

Maybe we do need a hand jerking emoji. Better yet, you can use it as your avatar.

Cracking down would mean stop giving them legal protections they shouldn’t have if they are going to be “publishers”.
You either don’t censor and get the legal benefits that go with that public forum, or you don’t.
They are having. It both ways.

"It's different when we do it."

It's been explained very simply. You're making a deliberate effort to misunderstand.

What a child.

 

[daveman]

To quote a leftist icon:

"What difference does it make?"

-- Hillary Clinton

Some of us aren't so casual about the truth. Clearly you are.

But I've decided the Trump/Russia collusion story is misinformation. So it is.

You know, like you do with conservative ideas.

You're a poster on a message board. Like I am.

A report by the US Senate carries a bit more heft.

But if you choose to believe an alternate version of reality....you've been doing it for five years. You probably have forgotten what truth is.

Thing is, I used to be a liberal. Never thought much about politics, just always voted Democrat.

Then I started paying attention. And the more I paid attention, the more conservative I found myself becoming.

Can you say that? Have you ever changed your beliefs?

Who was the last Democrat you voted for?

I used to hate the Electoral college. I don’t any more. I used to be firmly in Israel’s camp. Not any more.

Bill Clinton.

Now you're going to tell me I wasn't a real liberal Democrat.

Doubtful since Clinton was not all that liberal himself. So you haven't voted for a Democrat in this century. Cool.

"CLINTON WASNT A REAL LIBERAL".

Okay, I'm wasting my time with you.

 

[anynameyouwish]

Laughing.......those lamenting their 1st amendment rights haven't read so much as the first word of the 1st amendment.

It's the first five words that matter: "Congress shall make no law ..."

If only they'd stopped right there.

this libprog who thinks trump is scum agrees with you....

more or less....

 

[dblack]

Not at all. I don't know why you're refusing to get this.

The government would be dictating no terms. Publishers are subject to suit by individuals harmed by the publisher's material and the government's sole activity is deciding the case. If no one is harmed, no one files suit, and the government is uninvolved.

Maybe we do need a hand jerking emoji. Better yet, you can use it as your avatar.

Cracking down would mean stop giving them legal protections they shouldn’t have if they are going to be “publishers”.
You either don’t censor and get the legal benefits that go with that public forum, or you don’t.
They are having. It both ways.

"It's different when we do it."

It's been explained very simply. You're making a deliberate effort to misunderstand.

What a child.

LOL - you're no better than liberals. For statists, the whole point of government is to bully people.