If Progressives win the Culture War, would we still be living in a Free Society?

[DBA]

All of it is a wonderful display of how the white wing turns cosplay into victimhood.

The left knows all to well about victimhood. It is all they have.

 

[Curried Goats]

The left knows all to well about victimhood. It is all they have.

Please. You little victims equate getting banned from Twitter to a violation of your first amendment rights. It doesn't get much sadder than that Soy Boy.

 

[JoeB131]

Two things wrong here. If Twitter and Facebook want to editorialize their content they should not have section 230 protection.

I think you are confused as to what 230 protection is, but never mind. Censorship is not editorializing. And frankly, before I blocked the idiots, I still saw lots of Pro-Trump shit in my feed on Facebook.

Secondly, do think advertizers want their adds showing next to some wack-job holding a severated Donald Trump head? Kathy Griffin di that. Was it censored?

Let's see now, Kathy lost her job on CNN and a lot of other gigs. Her career never recovered.

Would you consider that hate speech?

Well, no, since it was directed against a specific individual, not a group. It was in very poor taste.

It works both ways, but you want it only your way. If you don’t agree with it, it is misinformation and should be censored.

No, it should get removed because it IS misinformation, and I've had content removed from Facebook because it turned out to be inaccurate. For instance, when Kyle Rittenhouse was first arrested, a criminal record of another Kyle Rittenhouse made the rounds, was repeated, and removed by facebook and and anyone who posted it got a warning.

Much COVID and vaccine information was censored by Twitter, not because it was misinformation, but because it didn’t fit the narrative the CDC and the Democrats wanted to promote.

Right, that's what made it misinformation. I mean, I'm sorry if you treated your Covid with Horse medicine, but that was bad advice.

 

[DBA]

Please. You little victims equate getting banned from Twitter to a violation of your first amendment rights. It doesn't get much sadder than that Soy Boy.

Government run media is your thing I see.

 

[Curried Goats]

Government run media is your thing I see.

Twitter is run by a crony capitalist who is more than happy to have a friendly relationship with the government if it gets him more tax breaks. Maybe you shouldn't idolize media companies.

 

[beagle9]

Yup.

Nothing is stopping you wingnuts from starting your own social media platforms. Hey, what ever happened to Parler, anyway?

The First Amendment is only preventing CONGRESS From banning speech. Twitter can ban speech to it's heart's content. For that matter, so can USMB.

The problem with Lead Twit Musk is that he is removing policies that kind of made sense. No company wants their banner ad appearing next to a tweet from Naziboi1488. Twitter was barely making money before Musk got there. Now advertisers are leaving in droves.

Can't ban it if government is involved, otherwise being a recipient of the outcomes you knucklehead.. Good grief.

Yes it can be banned on private platforms, but that's in no way what happened. Anymore of your idiotic responses ?

 

[JoeB131]

Government run media is your thing I see.

Except the government isn't running the media, is it?

Let's be blunt what your butthurt is. You are under some delusion that if Twitter had only let you guys spread the fake laptop story, that would have swung the election. Because Trump certainly wasn't going to win on half a million dead people and 65 million jobs lost.

Twitter made a decision not to run it, because there were serious legal questions about running a report based on hacked materials that may have been altered. let's not forget, you guys all thought it was wonderful when Nick Sandmann won settlements because the media took a viral tape at face value.

 

[JoeB131]

Can't ban it if government is involved, otherwise being a recipient of the outcomes you knucklehead.. Good grief.

Yes it can be banned on private platforms, but that's in no way what happened. Anymore of your idiotic responses ?

Um, that's exactly what happened. Twitter CHOSE not to run the bullshit laptop story. The government (which Trump was in charge of at the time, lest we forget) didn't ban them from running it.

 

[beagle9]

Except the government isn't running the media, is it?

Let's be blunt what your butthurt is. You are under some delusion that if Twitter had only let you guys spread the fake laptop story, that would have swung the election. Because Trump certainly wasn't going to win on half a million dead people and 65 million jobs lost.

Twitter made a decision not to run it, because there were serious legal questions about running a report based on hacked materials that may have been altered. let's not forget, you guys all thought it was wonderful when Nick Sandmann won settlements because the media took a viral tape at face value.

Fake laptop story eh ? You get more and more desperate everytime you post.

 

[JoeB131]

Fake laptop story eh ? You get more and more desperate everytime you post.

Yup, sorry, the laptop is fake.

 

[Man of Ethics]

If the Progressives take over you not only will lose freedom of speech and freedom of the press (no Fox News) but the right of civilians to own firearms.

Paradoxically, this is one of the issues where I agree with Progressives. Guns are used to kill people -- over 10,000 homicides and 20,000 suicides each year in USA.

I am neither Progressive nor Conservative.

 

[Man of Ethics]

Censorship, like Twitter was doing, was NOT at all "progressive".
Twitter has its own agenda, and it was not at all "progressive" in any way.
In fact, it likely was attempting to reduce political controversy in order to make more money.
That is very conservative.
Generally is it conservatives who censor, because they do not want people to question or want change.
Progressives want change, so want provocative content.

In 2014, all Social Media was very free. Since 2011, Progressives have been pressuring Social Media companies to ban their opponents.

 

[Batcat]

Paradoxically, this is one of the issues where I agree with Progressives. Guns are used to kill people -- over 10,000 homicides and 20,000 suicides each year in USA.

I am neither Progressive nor Conservative.

The question is how many lives do guns save each year and how many crimes do they prevent. Statistics on that subject are hard to find. Part of the reason for that is often a firearm deters a crime but the incident never is recorded in a database.

For example my daughter stopped an intruder from entering our house by forcing a sliding glass door open. She pointed a revolver at him and he ran. She then called the police but they never caught the guy. The guy might have raped or even killed her had she not had a large caliber revolver to stop him. I doubt that case was ever recorded for statistical purposes.

Gun Control Debate: How Many Lives Are Saved By Guns — And Why Don't Gun Controllers Care? | Stock News & Stock Market Analysis - IBD

Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals.

www.investors.com

At this moment I am watching a TV program talking about the police shortage in New Orleans. Apparently it may take 2 hours for the police to respond to a 911 call. I hate to imagine what might happen to innocent victims ofr a home invasion in that time span.

StackPath

Murders up 43%, NOPD response time slower says New Orleans City Council report

“NOPD’s average response time to calls for service for emergency incidents is roughly twice as long for District D and E (41 and 50 minutes) compared to Districts A, B, and C (approximately 24 minu…

wgno.com

It is possible at sometime in the future laws will be passed to ban and confiscate perhaps all semiautomatic firearms including pistols Or perhaps all civilian owned firearms with a few exceptions. Criminals who violate the law as part of their profession are unlikely to turn their firearms in.

I would hate to be living in a city like New Orleans if gun bans and confiscations happen. I wouldn’t want to leave my family unprotected by turning in my firearms, but how would I protect them if the cops can’t respond for 2 hours? Attack a man with a firearm with a baseball bat? Throw a can of beans at him?

 

[Man of Ethics]

For example my daughter stopped an intruder from entering our house by forcing a sliding glass door open. She pointed a revolver at him and he ran. She then called the police but they never caught the guy. The guy might have raped or even killed her had she not had a large caliber revolver to stop him. I doubt that case was ever recorded for statistical purposes.

Thank you for sharing. In reality, self-defense by guns is rare.

 

[Batcat]

Thank you for sharing. In reality, self-defense by guns is rare.

Rare in what sense?

In my family my mother, my daughter, my uncle, my grandfather and my stepdad all used firearms for self defense.

Each as far as I know only used a firearm for self defense once in their life.

Fortunately, I have never had to use a firearm for self defense in the 30 years I have been legally carrying a concealed weapon but I came close two times.

You might argue that one time in a person life is rare but not having a firearm to use for self defense could have cost the people I mentioned their life at that point.

I also might owe the fact that I am here today to the fact that my mom had a revolver in her purse when when was walking home from work and was attacked by a man who was hiding behind some bushes. She pulled her tiny S&W Ladysmith .22 Long revolver and fired two shots over the man’s head and he ran. That revolver was so underpowered that she could have shot him with all seven rounds and merely pissed him off.

 

[beagle9]

Yup, sorry, the laptop is fake.

View attachment 737285

The only way it becomes fake is if Biden gets his way in making it a fake, but we are way on down the road from that happening. Hopefully that won't be the case concerning our ideals on Justice, and justice being blind, and no one person's finger is somehow being placed upon the scale ...

 

[DBA]

Except the government isn't running the media, is it?

Let's be blunt what your butthurt is. You are under some delusion that if Twitter had only let you guys spread the fake laptop story, that would have swung the election. Because Trump certainly wasn't going to win on half a million dead people and 65 million jobs lost.

Twitter made a decision not to run it, because there were serious legal questions about running a report based on hacked materials that may have been altered. let's not forget, you guys all thought it was wonderful when Nick Sandmann won settlements because the media took a viral tape at face value.

The laptop story was not “fake”. It was not Russian disinformation. It as if you don’t know what is going on. It is strange.

Twitter worked directly with the FBI, who was/is obviously anti-Trump, to censor. That is abundantly clear from the Twitter dumps. You and others like you choose to ignore it and the MSM doesn’t even cover it because they like to keep their sheep ignorant. For those of you that do actually know about the dumps, your defend at all costs indoctrination kicks in. It is sad and scary to see just how ignorant, indoctrinated and corrupt the average Democrat really is.

 

[DBA]

The only way it becomes fake is if Biden gets his way in making it a fake, but we are way on down the road from that happening. Hopefully that won't be the case concerning our ideals on Justice, and justice being blind, and no one person's finger is somehow being placed upon the scale ...

In their wee little brains, it will be “fake” and all will be well no matter what the House turns up as long as the corrupt Biden DOJ refuses to investigate or prosecute.

 

[surada]

Agree 100%. Mostly they stand for Tyranny and Censorship. That is scary.

You won't have the Fascism of forced religiosity.

 

[miketx]

The comments are hilarious. All we have to do is exercise our rights.