Mitch McConnel Bravely Tells The Corporate Elite To Stay Out Of Politics

[TemplarKormac]

When competition is kept out due to collusion, there's not much voluntary about it. Parler's collapse was a good example of that.

It depends on whether the collusion is fraudulent. There's nothing illegal about shunning those we find reprehensible. Nor should there be.

Plenty of people find certain races or ethnicities reprehensible, but it is illegal to shun them from service. So, the precedent has already been set for protecting some classes over others. It's why political orientation isn't a stretch to include in that group. Political orientation is no more mutable than religion is, yet we protect religion from discrimination.

I actually really like this point. We protect freedom of religion in this country, because we believe - or we once did, when people actually had some clue about such things - that each person should be able to believe what he or she wants, express those beliefs, and act on them, without fear of persecution. Politics is just another set of beliefs, and people should have as much freedom to act in accordance with their own conscience in that set of beliefs as they do in a set of religious beliefs.

"It's different when we do it".

This simply extends and legitimizes a policy that is a direct violation of equal protection (as well as freedom of association). Inviting another 'protected class' to join the gravy train. Who's next?

What's different now? I doubt Andrew Carnegie becomes the same philanthopist if the Homestead Strike had not happened and public opinion turned on him.

Huh? Not following.

Well, I was asking what you meant about another protected class. All I see is corporations acting in their own (shareholders's) financial interests.

I think Carnegie went for "image" as well.

Just smile and nod. Their entire culture and way of life is dying off in the next 10 years, and they are going to insanity rather than assimilation. Just pat them on the back and say "I know, I know".

Best description of the left being deaf to all reason because they're too in love with the destruction they wreak I've ever heard. Thanks for sharing.

I don't even know why I'm still amazed that you people can't hear what you actually sound like.

Your way of life will be gone by 2030. So enjoy it.

What "way of life" is that, Adolf?

Every single person you watch on Twitter and Youtube in the year 2021 will be banned and gone by 2030.

That "way of life". So enjoy it while it lasts.

Whut?

 

[marvin martian]

When competition is kept out due to collusion, there's not much voluntary about it. Parler's collapse was a good example of that.

It depends on whether the collusion is fraudulent. There's nothing illegal about shunning those we find reprehensible. Nor should there be.

Plenty of people find certain races or ethnicities reprehensible, but it is illegal to shun them from service. So, the precedent has already been set for protecting some classes over others. It's why political orientation isn't a stretch to include in that group. Political orientation is no more mutable than religion is, yet we protect religion from discrimination.

I actually really like this point. We protect freedom of religion in this country, because we believe - or we once did, when people actually had some clue about such things - that each person should be able to believe what he or she wants, express those beliefs, and act on them, without fear of persecution. Politics is just another set of beliefs, and people should have as much freedom to act in accordance with their own conscience in that set of beliefs as they do in a set of religious beliefs.

"It's different when we do it".

This simply extends and legitimizes a policy that is a direct violation of equal protection (as well as freedom of association). Inviting another 'protected class' to join the gravy train. Who's next?

What's different now? I doubt Andrew Carnegie becomes the same philanthopist if the Homestead Strike had not happened and public opinion turned on him.

Huh? Not following.

Well, I was asking what you meant about another protected class. All I see is corporations acting in their own (shareholders's) financial interests.

I think Carnegie went for "image" as well.

Just smile and nod. Their entire culture and way of life is dying off in the next 10 years, and they are going to insanity rather than assimilation. Just pat them on the back and say "I know, I know".

Best description of the left being deaf to all reason because they're too in love with the destruction they wreak I've ever heard. Thanks for sharing.

I don't even know why I'm still amazed that you people can't hear what you actually sound like.

Your way of life will be gone by 2030. So enjoy it.

What "way of life" is that, Adolf?

Every single person you watch on Twitter and Youtube in the year 2021 will be banned and gone by 2030.

That "way of life". So enjoy it while it lasts.

Ah, you're talking about free speech. I thought so.

 

[Cecilie1200]

When competition is kept out due to collusion, there's not much voluntary about it. Parler's collapse was a good example of that.

It depends on whether the collusion is fraudulent. There's nothing illegal about shunning those we find reprehensible. Nor should there be.

Plenty of people find certain races or ethnicities reprehensible, but it is illegal to shun them from service. So, the precedent has already been set for protecting some classes over others. It's why political orientation isn't a stretch to include in that group. Political orientation is no more mutable than religion is, yet we protect religion from discrimination.

I actually really like this point. We protect freedom of religion in this country, because we believe - or we once did, when people actually had some clue about such things - that each person should be able to believe what he or she wants, express those beliefs, and act on them, without fear of persecution. Politics is just another set of beliefs, and people should have as much freedom to act in accordance with their own conscience in that set of beliefs as they do in a set of religious beliefs.

"It's different when we do it".

This simply extends and legitimizes a policy that is a direct violation of equal protection (as well as freedom of association). Inviting another 'protected class' to join the gravy train. Who's next?

What's different now? I doubt Andrew Carnegie becomes the same philanthopist if the Homestead Strike had not happened and public opinion turned on him.

Huh? Not following.

Well, I was asking what you meant about another protected class. All I see is corporations acting in their own (shareholders's) financial interests.

I think Carnegie went for "image" as well.

Just smile and nod. Their entire culture and way of life is dying off in the next 10 years, and they are going to insanity rather than assimilation. Just pat them on the back and say "I know, I know".

Best description of the left being deaf to all reason because they're too in love with the destruction they wreak I've ever heard. Thanks for sharing.

I don't even know why I'm still amazed that you people can't hear what you actually sound like.

Your way of life will be gone by 2030. So enjoy it.

The fact that you're pleased and proud of that idea tells me more clearly than any other nonsense you've drooled down your chin that you deserve every single bit of scorn I have ever heaped on your non-existent intelligence.

I don't argue that you and your other sniveling leftist lickspittles will probably destroy my way of life at the behest of your masters, because you've proven yourself to be exactly that stupid and self-destructive, you arrogant little twat. But I'm not the one who's going to have to "enjoy" the fruits of your slavery; YOU are.

I only wish I was still going to be around to see you weeping and gnashing your teeth when karma catches up to you. I hope Heaven has windows, so I can look down and laugh at you.

 

[AFrench2]

When competition is kept out due to collusion, there's not much voluntary about it. Parler's collapse was a good example of that.

It depends on whether the collusion is fraudulent. There's nothing illegal about shunning those we find reprehensible. Nor should there be.

Plenty of people find certain races or ethnicities reprehensible, but it is illegal to shun them from service. So, the precedent has already been set for protecting some classes over others. It's why political orientation isn't a stretch to include in that group. Political orientation is no more mutable than religion is, yet we protect religion from discrimination.

I actually really like this point. We protect freedom of religion in this country, because we believe - or we once did, when people actually had some clue about such things - that each person should be able to believe what he or she wants, express those beliefs, and act on them, without fear of persecution. Politics is just another set of beliefs, and people should have as much freedom to act in accordance with their own conscience in that set of beliefs as they do in a set of religious beliefs.

"It's different when we do it".

This simply extends and legitimizes a policy that is a direct violation of equal protection (as well as freedom of association). Inviting another 'protected class' to join the gravy train. Who's next?

What's different now? I doubt Andrew Carnegie becomes the same philanthopist if the Homestead Strike had not happened and public opinion turned on him.

Huh? Not following.

Well, I was asking what you meant about another protected class. All I see is corporations acting in their own (shareholders's) financial interests.

I think Carnegie went for "image" as well.

Just smile and nod. Their entire culture and way of life is dying off in the next 10 years, and they are going to insanity rather than assimilation. Just pat them on the back and say "I know, I know".

Best description of the left being deaf to all reason because they're too in love with the destruction they wreak I've ever heard. Thanks for sharing.

I don't even know why I'm still amazed that you people can't hear what you actually sound like.

Your way of life will be gone by 2030. So enjoy it.

What "way of life" is that, Adolf?

Every single person you watch on Twitter and Youtube in the year 2021 will be banned and gone by 2030.

That "way of life". So enjoy it while it lasts.

Ah, you're talking about free speech. I thought so.

go watch your Republican stuff on Youtube.

You won't have it much longer.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell lashed out at corporate America on Monday, warning CEOs to stay out of the debate over a new voting law in Georgia that has been criticized as restricting votes among minorities and the poor.

"Corporations will invite serious consequences if they become a vehicle for far-left mobs to hijack our country from outside the constitutional order," McConnell told a news conference in his home state of Kentucky.

Big business ties with Republicans began fraying under former President Donald Trump's leadership and the party's focus on voting restrictions has soured businesses embracing diversity as key to their work force and customer base. Major Georgia employers Coca-Cola and Delta Air Lines have spoken out against the law signed by Governor Brian Kemp, and Major League Baseball pulled the 2021 All-Star Game out of the state over the law strengthening identification requirements for absentee ballots and making it a crime to offer food or water to voters waiting in line.

'Stay out of politics,' Republican leader McConnell tells U.S. CEOs, warns of 'consequences'

U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell lashed out at corporate America on Monday, warning CEOs to stay out of the debate over a new voting law in Georgia that has been criticized as restricting votes among minorities and the poor. McConnell warned companies there could be risks for...

www.yahoo.com

Uh oh, Mitch is talking tough again. Watch out Coke.

It's OK Democrats will tax the Corporations out of the US first.

 

[Nostra]

When competition is kept out due to collusion, there's not much voluntary about it. Parler's collapse was a good example of that.

It depends on whether the collusion is fraudulent. There's nothing illegal about shunning those we find reprehensible. Nor should there be.

Plenty of people find certain races or ethnicities reprehensible, but it is illegal to shun them from service. So, the precedent has already been set for protecting some classes over others. It's why political orientation isn't a stretch to include in that group. Political orientation is no more mutable than religion is, yet we protect religion from discrimination.

I actually really like this point. We protect freedom of religion in this country, because we believe - or we once did, when people actually had some clue about such things - that each person should be able to believe what he or she wants, express those beliefs, and act on them, without fear of persecution. Politics is just another set of beliefs, and people should have as much freedom to act in accordance with their own conscience in that set of beliefs as they do in a set of religious beliefs.

"It's different when we do it".

This simply extends and legitimizes a policy that is a direct violation of equal protection (as well as freedom of association). Inviting another 'protected class' to join the gravy train. Who's next?

What's different now? I doubt Andrew Carnegie becomes the same philanthopist if the Homestead Strike had not happened and public opinion turned on him.

Huh? Not following.

Well, I was asking what you meant about another protected class. All I see is corporations acting in their own (shareholders's) financial interests.

I think Carnegie went for "image" as well.

Just smile and nod. Their entire culture and way of life is dying off in the next 10 years, and they are going to insanity rather than assimilation. Just pat them on the back and say "I know, I know".

Best description of the left being deaf to all reason because they're too in love with the destruction they wreak I've ever heard. Thanks for sharing.

I don't even know why I'm still amazed that you people can't hear what you actually sound like.

Your way of life will be gone by 2030. So enjoy it.

What "way of life" is that, Adolf?

Every single person you watch on Twitter and Youtube in the year 2021 will be banned and gone by 2030.

That "way of life". So enjoy it while it lasts.

You need to go back to Troll School, and pay attention this time instead of spending the day eating boogers and picking your ass.

 

[marvin martian]

When competition is kept out due to collusion, there's not much voluntary about it. Parler's collapse was a good example of that.

It depends on whether the collusion is fraudulent. There's nothing illegal about shunning those we find reprehensible. Nor should there be.

Plenty of people find certain races or ethnicities reprehensible, but it is illegal to shun them from service. So, the precedent has already been set for protecting some classes over others. It's why political orientation isn't a stretch to include in that group. Political orientation is no more mutable than religion is, yet we protect religion from discrimination.

I actually really like this point. We protect freedom of religion in this country, because we believe - or we once did, when people actually had some clue about such things - that each person should be able to believe what he or she wants, express those beliefs, and act on them, without fear of persecution. Politics is just another set of beliefs, and people should have as much freedom to act in accordance with their own conscience in that set of beliefs as they do in a set of religious beliefs.

"It's different when we do it".

This simply extends and legitimizes a policy that is a direct violation of equal protection (as well as freedom of association). Inviting another 'protected class' to join the gravy train. Who's next?

What's different now? I doubt Andrew Carnegie becomes the same philanthopist if the Homestead Strike had not happened and public opinion turned on him.

Huh? Not following.

Well, I was asking what you meant about another protected class. All I see is corporations acting in their own (shareholders's) financial interests.

I think Carnegie went for "image" as well.

Just smile and nod. Their entire culture and way of life is dying off in the next 10 years, and they are going to insanity rather than assimilation. Just pat them on the back and say "I know, I know".

Best description of the left being deaf to all reason because they're too in love with the destruction they wreak I've ever heard. Thanks for sharing.

I don't even know why I'm still amazed that you people can't hear what you actually sound like.

Your way of life will be gone by 2030. So enjoy it.

What "way of life" is that, Adolf?

Every single person you watch on Twitter and Youtube in the year 2021 will be banned and gone by 2030.

That "way of life". So enjoy it while it lasts.

Ah, you're talking about free speech. I thought so.

go watch your Republican stuff on Youtube.

You won't have it much longer.

I christen you Babymao.

 

[Crepitus]

Private entities aren't regulating speech. They can't.

Then why do they have governing policies on their platforms dictating what is acceptable to post and what isn't? Why is Facebook banning Trump's very voice from its platform?

It is because they are regulating speech, something the law never intended them to do.

They are regulating their platforms. You are free to speak elsewhere.

Sure you said the same thing about the gay couple in the cake shop.

Take the hypocrisy elsewhere.

A. Not a speech issue, so the first amendment doesn't apply.

B. It's long been codified that businesses can't discriminate.

So...

C. These two things are completely unrelated.

 

[AFrench2]

I christen you Babymao.

That's cool, I christened you 'racist GOP bot' in February when I joined here.

My side has won. You have lost the culture war. Now enjoy the purging

 

[Crepitus]

Free speech is a guarantee made by the government

No. It is not. The guarantee is that the government will not interfere with your speech.

What you want, the government forcing social media platforms to let every hammerhead post his or her particular brand of crazy, would actually be the government violating the 1st.

 

[marvin martian]

I christen you Babymao.

That's cool, I christened you 'racist GOP bot' in February when I joined here.

My side has won. You have lost the culture war. Now enjoy the purging

Yet you're the racist here, aren't you?

 

[Cecilie1200]

When competition is kept out due to collusion, there's not much voluntary about it. Parler's collapse was a good example of that.

It depends on whether the collusion is fraudulent. There's nothing illegal about shunning those we find reprehensible. Nor should there be.

Plenty of people find certain races or ethnicities reprehensible, but it is illegal to shun them from service. So, the precedent has already been set for protecting some classes over others. It's why political orientation isn't a stretch to include in that group. Political orientation is no more mutable than religion is, yet we protect religion from discrimination.

I actually really like this point. We protect freedom of religion in this country, because we believe - or we once did, when people actually had some clue about such things - that each person should be able to believe what he or she wants, express those beliefs, and act on them, without fear of persecution. Politics is just another set of beliefs, and people should have as much freedom to act in accordance with their own conscience in that set of beliefs as they do in a set of religious beliefs.

"It's different when we do it".

This simply extends and legitimizes a policy that is a direct violation of equal protection (as well as freedom of association). Inviting another 'protected class' to join the gravy train. Who's next?

What's different now? I doubt Andrew Carnegie becomes the same philanthopist if the Homestead Strike had not happened and public opinion turned on him.

Huh? Not following.

Well, I was asking what you meant about another protected class. All I see is corporations acting in their own (shareholders's) financial interests.

I think Carnegie went for "image" as well.

Just smile and nod. Their entire culture and way of life is dying off in the next 10 years, and they are going to insanity rather than assimilation. Just pat them on the back and say "I know, I know".

Best description of the left being deaf to all reason because they're too in love with the destruction they wreak I've ever heard. Thanks for sharing.

I don't even know why I'm still amazed that you people can't hear what you actually sound like.

Your way of life will be gone by 2030. So enjoy it.

What "way of life" is that, Adolf?

Every single person you watch on Twitter and Youtube in the year 2021 will be banned and gone by 2030.

That "way of life". So enjoy it while it lasts.

Ah, you're talking about free speech. I thought so.

go watch your Republican stuff on Youtube.

You won't have it much longer.

I will be really curious, once I'm gone and you're "enjoying" the world you're rushing toward, which thought is going to cause you the most shame and agony: that you eagerly put the chains on yourself, or that you bragged about how you refused to listen to the people who tried to warn you they were going to chafe?

If your high school still taught REAL literature, instead of black lesbian slam poetry, you would know that the revolution ALWAYS eats its own.

 

[marvin martian]

When competition is kept out due to collusion, there's not much voluntary about it. Parler's collapse was a good example of that.

It depends on whether the collusion is fraudulent. There's nothing illegal about shunning those we find reprehensible. Nor should there be.

Plenty of people find certain races or ethnicities reprehensible, but it is illegal to shun them from service. So, the precedent has already been set for protecting some classes over others. It's why political orientation isn't a stretch to include in that group. Political orientation is no more mutable than religion is, yet we protect religion from discrimination.

I actually really like this point. We protect freedom of religion in this country, because we believe - or we once did, when people actually had some clue about such things - that each person should be able to believe what he or she wants, express those beliefs, and act on them, without fear of persecution. Politics is just another set of beliefs, and people should have as much freedom to act in accordance with their own conscience in that set of beliefs as they do in a set of religious beliefs.

"It's different when we do it".

This simply extends and legitimizes a policy that is a direct violation of equal protection (as well as freedom of association). Inviting another 'protected class' to join the gravy train. Who's next?

What's different now? I doubt Andrew Carnegie becomes the same philanthopist if the Homestead Strike had not happened and public opinion turned on him.

Huh? Not following.

Well, I was asking what you meant about another protected class. All I see is corporations acting in their own (shareholders's) financial interests.

I think Carnegie went for "image" as well.

Just smile and nod. Their entire culture and way of life is dying off in the next 10 years, and they are going to insanity rather than assimilation. Just pat them on the back and say "I know, I know".

Best description of the left being deaf to all reason because they're too in love with the destruction they wreak I've ever heard. Thanks for sharing.

I don't even know why I'm still amazed that you people can't hear what you actually sound like.

Your way of life will be gone by 2030. So enjoy it.

What "way of life" is that, Adolf?

Every single person you watch on Twitter and Youtube in the year 2021 will be banned and gone by 2030.

That "way of life". So enjoy it while it lasts.

Ah, you're talking about free speech. I thought so.

go watch your Republican stuff on Youtube.

You won't have it much longer.

I will be really curious, once I'm gone and you're "enjoying" the world you're rushing toward, which thought is going to cause you the most shame and agony: that you eagerly put the chains on yourself, or that you bragged about how you refused to listen to the people who tried to warn you they were going to chafe?

If your high school still taught REAL literature, instead of black lesbian slam poetry, you would know that the revolution ALWAYS eats its own.

Part of the fun is watching the useful idiots learn this the hard way.

 

[Cecilie1200]

When competition is kept out due to collusion, there's not much voluntary about it. Parler's collapse was a good example of that.

It depends on whether the collusion is fraudulent. There's nothing illegal about shunning those we find reprehensible. Nor should there be.

Plenty of people find certain races or ethnicities reprehensible, but it is illegal to shun them from service. So, the precedent has already been set for protecting some classes over others. It's why political orientation isn't a stretch to include in that group. Political orientation is no more mutable than religion is, yet we protect religion from discrimination.

I actually really like this point. We protect freedom of religion in this country, because we believe - or we once did, when people actually had some clue about such things - that each person should be able to believe what he or she wants, express those beliefs, and act on them, without fear of persecution. Politics is just another set of beliefs, and people should have as much freedom to act in accordance with their own conscience in that set of beliefs as they do in a set of religious beliefs.

"It's different when we do it".

This simply extends and legitimizes a policy that is a direct violation of equal protection (as well as freedom of association). Inviting another 'protected class' to join the gravy train. Who's next?

What's different now? I doubt Andrew Carnegie becomes the same philanthopist if the Homestead Strike had not happened and public opinion turned on him.

Huh? Not following.

Well, I was asking what you meant about another protected class. All I see is corporations acting in their own (shareholders's) financial interests.

I think Carnegie went for "image" as well.

Just smile and nod. Their entire culture and way of life is dying off in the next 10 years, and they are going to insanity rather than assimilation. Just pat them on the back and say "I know, I know".

Best description of the left being deaf to all reason because they're too in love with the destruction they wreak I've ever heard. Thanks for sharing.

I don't even know why I'm still amazed that you people can't hear what you actually sound like.

Your way of life will be gone by 2030. So enjoy it.

What "way of life" is that, Adolf?

Every single person you watch on Twitter and Youtube in the year 2021 will be banned and gone by 2030.

That "way of life". So enjoy it while it lasts.

Ah, you're talking about free speech. I thought so.

go watch your Republican stuff on Youtube.

You won't have it much longer.

I christen you Babymao.

No, he's not Mao, not even in miniature. He's Robespierre . . . and Trotsky . . . and every other useful idiot who laughed in glee when his "glorious revolution" killed his enemies, without realizing that it was going to come for him next.

And I will bet money that his puffed-up, arrogant punk ass has no idea who any of these people are.

 

[dblack]

Private entities aren't regulating speech. They can't.

Then why do they have governing policies on their platforms dictating what is acceptable to post and what isn't? Why is Facebook banning Trump's very voice from its platform?

It is because they are regulating speech, something the law never intended them to do.

They are regulating their platforms. You are free to speak elsewhere.

Free speech is a guarantee made by the government, and it is not for a platform like Twitter or Facebook to regulate.

Twitter and Facebook can't "regulate" anything. They have no power to pass or enforce laws. Only government has that power.

 

[AFrench2]

Okay, okay, get back on topic.

 

[dblack]

Private entities aren't regulating speech. They can't.

Then why do they have governing policies on their platforms dictating what is acceptable to post and what isn't? Why is Facebook banning Trump's very voice from its platform?

It is because they are regulating speech, something the law never intended them to do.

They are regulating their platforms. You are free to speak elsewhere.

Sure you said the same thing about the gay couple in the cake shop.

Take the hypocrisy elsewhere.

What was your view on that issue?

 

[Cecilie1200]

I christen you Babymao.

That's cool, I christened you 'racist GOP bot' in February when I joined here.

My side has won. You have lost the culture war. Now enjoy the purging

See, Marvin? He has no fucking idea what you're talking about. He thinks it's just empty insults, like he deals in.
"My side has won". And what's that do for you, Robespierre? Do you really think "the purging" EVER stops with just the people you don't like, so that's okay?

Pick any revolution in human history, always assuming you can figure out how to find anything on the Internet besides porn. See if you can find one that didn't end up killing and/or enslaving the very fools who gleefully cheered for it.

Your "side" may have won, but you're too damned dumb to see that YOU lost when they did.

 

[AFrench2]

Lmao Robespierre

 

[Cecilie1200]

When competition is kept out due to collusion, there's not much voluntary about it. Parler's collapse was a good example of that.

It depends on whether the collusion is fraudulent. There's nothing illegal about shunning those we find reprehensible. Nor should there be.

Plenty of people find certain races or ethnicities reprehensible, but it is illegal to shun them from service. So, the precedent has already been set for protecting some classes over others. It's why political orientation isn't a stretch to include in that group. Political orientation is no more mutable than religion is, yet we protect religion from discrimination.

I actually really like this point. We protect freedom of religion in this country, because we believe - or we once did, when people actually had some clue about such things - that each person should be able to believe what he or she wants, express those beliefs, and act on them, without fear of persecution. Politics is just another set of beliefs, and people should have as much freedom to act in accordance with their own conscience in that set of beliefs as they do in a set of religious beliefs.

"It's different when we do it".

This simply extends and legitimizes a policy that is a direct violation of equal protection (as well as freedom of association). Inviting another 'protected class' to join the gravy train. Who's next?

What's different now? I doubt Andrew Carnegie becomes the same philanthopist if the Homestead Strike had not happened and public opinion turned on him.

Huh? Not following.

Well, I was asking what you meant about another protected class. All I see is corporations acting in their own (shareholders's) financial interests.

I think Carnegie went for "image" as well.

Just smile and nod. Their entire culture and way of life is dying off in the next 10 years, and they are going to insanity rather than assimilation. Just pat them on the back and say "I know, I know".

Best description of the left being deaf to all reason because they're too in love with the destruction they wreak I've ever heard. Thanks for sharing.

I don't even know why I'm still amazed that you people can't hear what you actually sound like.

Your way of life will be gone by 2030. So enjoy it.

What "way of life" is that, Adolf?

Every single person you watch on Twitter and Youtube in the year 2021 will be banned and gone by 2030.

That "way of life". So enjoy it while it lasts.

Ah, you're talking about free speech. I thought so.

go watch your Republican stuff on Youtube.

You won't have it much longer.

I will be really curious, once I'm gone and you're "enjoying" the world you're rushing toward, which thought is going to cause you the most shame and agony: that you eagerly put the chains on yourself, or that you bragged about how you refused to listen to the people who tried to warn you they were going to chafe?

If your high school still taught REAL literature, instead of black lesbian slam poetry, you would know that the revolution ALWAYS eats its own.

Part of the fun is watching the useful idiots learn this the hard way.

Like I said, by the time he's crying in the smoking rubble of what he's wrought, I won't be here. And Heaven probably doesn't allow schadenfreude.