The Democrat War Against Free Speech

[Camp]

I found plenty - like when I pointed out it was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH -- and you conveniently ignored it.

Just like you ignore anything that doesn't support your congenitally stupid OP's/

You mean when you lied about my bringing it up??

You don't mind your lies being revealed?
Gee....you must be a Liberal.

See? She won't discuss the facts of the matter.

It was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH.

How about you address that?

You're an unrepentant liar.....what's to discuss?

I skipped some pages. Are you still fighting for and defending stuff like kiddie porn and burning the flag?

So....when did you stop beating your wife?

See? She won't discuss the facts of the matter.

She's stuck on the fact "all Free Speech" in her OP didn't actually mean "all Free Speech," -- so she can't even address the fact

It was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH.

Everybody is watching you evade and ignore. It's not pretty.

I think she will come out swinging at me with some really cool insults and interesting name calling.

You're not the first member of Masochists of America that posts on the board.
Nor the brightest.

Not bad, but you can do better. Remove the vegetables and fruit or plastic for a few moments and give it some better thought.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You mean when you lied about my bringing it up??

You don't mind your lies being revealed?
Gee....you must be a Liberal.

See? She won't discuss the facts of the matter.

It was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH.

How about you address that?

You're an unrepentant liar.....what's to discuss?

I skipped some pages. Are you still fighting for and defending stuff like kiddie porn and burning the flag?

So....when did you stop beating your wife?

See? She won't discuss the facts of the matter.

She's stuck on the fact "all Free Speech" in her OP didn't actually mean "all Free Speech," -- so she can't even address the fact

It was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH.

Everybody is watching you evade and ignore. It's not pretty.

I think she will come out swinging at me with some really cool insults and interesting name calling.

You're not the first member of Masochists of America that posts on the board.
Nor the brightest.

Not bad, but you can do better. Remove the vegetables and fruit or plastic for a few moments and give it some better thought.

"...but you can do better..."


Masochist to the sadist: "Hit me, beat me, whip me...."

Sadist: "Nooooooo......."

 

[PaintMyHouse]

See? She won't discuss the facts of the matter.

It was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH.

How about you address that?

You're an unrepentant liar.....what's to discuss?

I skipped some pages. Are you still fighting for and defending stuff like kiddie porn and burning the flag?

So....when did you stop beating your wife?

See? She won't discuss the facts of the matter.

She's stuck on the fact "all Free Speech" in her OP didn't actually mean "all Free Speech," -- so she can't even address the fact

It was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH.

Everybody is watching you evade and ignore. It's not pretty.

I think she will come out swinging at me with some really cool insults and interesting name calling.

You're not the first member of Masochists of America that posts on the board.
Nor the brightest.

Not bad, but you can do better. Remove the vegetables and fruit or plastic for a few moments and give it some better thought.

"...but you can do better..."


Masochist to the sadist: "Hit me, beat me, whip me...."

Sadist: "Nooooooo......."

 

[paperview]

See? She won't discuss the facts of the matter.

It was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH.

How about you address that?

Comrade, I gave you half a dozen examples of your filthy party attacking free speech, and you've ignored them all.

Why the double standard?

I see you're holding PoliticalChicky to that standard. (That's sarcasm, in case you didn't notice.)

It's her premise (one where only certain kinds of Free Speech was what she meant when she said all and "no law"...), and we can't even get to the first base of her admitting or even discussing examples of how her OP fails.

Why the double standard?

Once PC and you even admit to the premise and first discussion that ensued - maybe we can tackle your comments.

 

[Camp]

See? She won't discuss the facts of the matter.

It was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH.

How about you address that?

You're an unrepentant liar.....what's to discuss?

I skipped some pages. Are you still fighting for and defending stuff like kiddie porn and burning the flag?

So....when did you stop beating your wife?

See? She won't discuss the facts of the matter.

She's stuck on the fact "all Free Speech" in her OP didn't actually mean "all Free Speech," -- so she can't even address the fact

It was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH.

Everybody is watching you evade and ignore. It's not pretty.

I think she will come out swinging at me with some really cool insults and interesting name calling.

You're not the first member of Masochists of America that posts on the board.
Nor the brightest.

Not bad, but you can do better. Remove the vegetables and fruit or plastic for a few moments and give it some better thought.

"...but you can do better..."


Masochist to the sadist: "Hit me, beat me, whip me...."

Sadist: "Nooooooo......."

Never mind. I didn't expect you to get all jungle horny and treat the message board like some kind of phone sex type thing. Go ahead and re-insert the fruit and switch on the vibrating device of the plastic thingy. I want nothing to do with your weirdness.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Your conservative brethren here:

Did you find any posts where I said that?


You're dying to find something, anything.

You haven't.

I found plenty - like when I pointed out it was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH -- and you conveniently ignored it.

Just like you ignore anything that doesn't support your congenitally stupid OP's/

You mean when you lied about my bringing it up??

You don't mind your lies being revealed?
Gee....you must be a Liberal.

See? She won't discuss the facts of the matter.

It was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH.

How about you address that?

You're an unrepentant liar.....what's to discuss?

How predictable ^^^, unable to defend herself she goes on the attack.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I noticed that all our Liberal/Progressive/Democrat pals are deathly silent about

1. ...a Democrat Congressman suing to keep some group from advertising that his vote authorized funds for abortion....
none of the Leftists defending him???

2. ....Democrats Reid and Markey want 'hate speech' legislation ...causes of offense are "gender, race, religion, ethnicity or sexual orientation."

In other words, anything.
....none of the Leftists penning posts in favor of same???

3. ....and Democrat LBJ, the 'father of illegitimacy,' made it illegal for churches to engage in political speech.
Where are all the Leftist posts supporting this unconstitutional power grab???


Where is all that vaunted Leftist 'critical thinking'????

3. The Johnson Amendment was challenged in court and the challenge lost.[/QUOTE]



So.....you insist on proving Coulter correct?


Coulter:

1. If liberals could trust the voters, they wouldn’t need the Court to invent ludicrous ‘constitutional rights’ for them in the first place.
2. The only limit on liberal insanity in this country is how many issues liberals can get before a court…A lot is at stake for liberals with the court. If they lose a liberal vote, they will be forced t fight political battles through a messy little system know as ‘democracy.’
3. When conservative judges strike down laws, it’s because of what’s in the Constitution. When liberal judges strike down laws (or impose new laws, such as tax increases), it’s because of what’s in the New York Times.

It really wasn't necessary.[/QUOTE]

Coulter is wrong on every count, which probably explains your knack for making a fool of yourself on a regular basis.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Edmund Rostand won't mind if I borrow this:
Now...as I end my refrain......thrust home!!


10. Democrats never cease looking for ways to restrict free speech.....how to solve this?



"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." Thomas Jefferson

No where is this more appropriate than in the demands for freedom of speech.
Beware of all sorts of implied restrictions on free speech....

a. The President insisted on the removal of "War on Terrorism," and, recently we've seen all sorts of pressures to restrict references to Mohammad, and the euphemistic use of letters for racial slurs. All of these are un-American.

b. Be very careful when government tells you that it is about to regulate free speech in your interest.....

" President Obama's November 10 announcement that he would seek the “strongest possible rules” through the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to enforce "net neutrality" is a strong threat to both the freedoms of speech and press, and will throttle the progress of the Internet.....

Whenever the president calls for the “strongest possible rules” on the world's largest transmission belt of free speech and free press, Americans can expect that it's not a move to maintain government separation from free speech and the free press."
Obama s Net Neutrality Rules Threat to Free Speech



c."... the movement behind net neutrality—from President Barack Obama to New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, and reportedly to New York Senators Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand [Democrats, all!] —is coming from the left for political reasons. As liberal dominance of the media has waned under the shadow of FOX News, conservative talk radio and websites such as the Drudge Report, some in the Democratic Party have been looking for creative ways to maintain, or regain, the “mainstream media’s” liberal clout. Net neutrality is one way to attain their goal of dominating the media." Limbaugh is Right Net Neutrality Is An Attack On Free Speech -- So Why Is Comcast For It - Forbes



"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." Our greatest weapon against the Democrats and their attacks on freedom of speech!


Beware, America.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Did you find any posts where I said that?


You're dying to find something, anything.

You haven't.

I found plenty - like when I pointed out it was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH -- and you conveniently ignored it.

Just like you ignore anything that doesn't support your congenitally stupid OP's/

You mean when you lied about my bringing it up??

You don't mind your lies being revealed?
Gee....you must be a Liberal.

See? She won't discuss the facts of the matter.

It was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH.

How about you address that?

You're an unrepentant liar.....what's to discuss?

How predictable ^^^, unable to defend herself she goes on the attack.

It is the reason you appear in these threads....your hunger to be beaten and abused.
It speaks to your sense of self-realization.....you know what you deserve.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Edmund Rostand won't mind if I borrow this:
Now...as I end my refrain......thrust home!!


10. Democrats never cease looking for ways to restrict free speech.....how to solve this?



"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." Thomas Jefferson

No where is this more appropriate than in the demands for freedom of speech.
Beware of all sorts of implied restrictions on free speech....

a. The President insisted on the removal of "War on Terrorism," and, recently we've seen all sorts of pressures to restrict references to Mohammad, and the euphemistic use of letters for racial slurs. All of these are un-American.

b. Be very careful when government tells you that it is about to regulate free speech in your interest.....

" President Obama's November 10 announcement that he would seek the “strongest possible rules” through the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to enforce "net neutrality" is a strong threat to both the freedoms of speech and press, and will throttle the progress of the Internet.....

Whenever the president calls for the “strongest possible rules” on the world's largest transmission belt of free speech and free press, Americans can expect that it's not a move to maintain government separation from free speech and the free press."
Obama s Net Neutrality Rules Threat to Free Speech



c."... the movement behind net neutrality—from President Barack Obama to New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, and reportedly to New York Senators Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand [Democrats, all!] —is coming from the left for political reasons. As liberal dominance of the media has waned under the shadow of FOX News, conservative talk radio and websites such as the Drudge Report, some in the Democratic Party have been looking for creative ways to maintain, or regain, the “mainstream media’s” liberal clout. Net neutrality is one way to attain their goal of dominating the media." Limbaugh is Right Net Neutrality Is An Attack On Free Speech -- So Why Is Comcast For It - Forbes



"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." Our greatest weapon against the Democrats and their attacks on freedom of speech!


Beware, America.

New poll: Republicans and Democrats both overwhelmingly support net neutrality

New poll Republicans and Democrats both overwhelmingly support net neutrality - The Washington Post

Do you ever tire of being wrong?

 

[paperview]

I found plenty - like when I pointed out it was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH -- and you conveniently ignored it.

Just like you ignore anything that doesn't support your congenitally stupid OP's/

You mean when you lied about my bringing it up??

You don't mind your lies being revealed?
Gee....you must be a Liberal.

See? She won't discuss the facts of the matter.

It was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH.

How about you address that?

You're an unrepentant liar.....what's to discuss?

How predictable ^^^, unable to defend herself she goes on the attack.

It is the reason you appear in these threads....your hunger to be beaten and abused.
It speaks to your sense of self-realization.....you know what you deserve.

This is what your threads boil down to

 

[Camp]

Edmund Rostand won't mind if I borrow this:
Now...as I end my refrain......thrust home!!


10. Democrats never cease looking for ways to restrict free speech.....how to solve this?



"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." Thomas Jefferson

No where is this more appropriate than in the demands for freedom of speech.
Beware of all sorts of implied restrictions on free speech....

a. The President insisted on the removal of "War on Terrorism," and, recently we've seen all sorts of pressures to restrict references to Mohammad, and the euphemistic use of letters for racial slurs. All of these are un-American.

b. Be very careful when government tells you that it is about to regulate free speech in your interest.....

" President Obama's November 10 announcement that he would seek the “strongest possible rules” through the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to enforce "net neutrality" is a strong threat to both the freedoms of speech and press, and will throttle the progress of the Internet.....

Whenever the president calls for the “strongest possible rules” on the world's largest transmission belt of free speech and free press, Americans can expect that it's not a move to maintain government separation from free speech and the free press."
Obama s Net Neutrality Rules Threat to Free Speech



c."... the movement behind net neutrality—from President Barack Obama to New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, and reportedly to New York Senators Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand [Democrats, all!] —is coming from the left for political reasons. As liberal dominance of the media has waned under the shadow of FOX News, conservative talk radio and websites such as the Drudge Report, some in the Democratic Party have been looking for creative ways to maintain, or regain, the “mainstream media’s” liberal clout. Net neutrality is one way to attain their goal of dominating the media." Limbaugh is Right Net Neutrality Is An Attack On Free Speech -- So Why Is Comcast For It - Forbes



"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." Our greatest weapon against the Democrats and their attacks on freedom of speech!


Beware, America.

New poll: Republicans and Democrats both overwhelmingly support net neutrality

New poll Republicans and Democrats both overwhelmingly support net neutrality - The Washington Post

Do you ever tire of being wrong?

Net Neutrality is all about free speech and access to free speech. People against it are in favor of corporate control of what will me available to users of the net, depending on which service provider is being used. It equates to straight forward fascism.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I found plenty - like when I pointed out it was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH -- and you conveniently ignored it.

Just like you ignore anything that doesn't support your congenitally stupid OP's/

You mean when you lied about my bringing it up??

You don't mind your lies being revealed?
Gee....you must be a Liberal.

See? She won't discuss the facts of the matter.

It was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH.

How about you address that?

You're an unrepentant liar.....what's to discuss?

How predictable ^^^, unable to defend herself she goes on the attack.

It is the reason you appear in these threads....your hunger to be beaten and abused.
It speaks to your sense of self-realization.....you know what you deserve.

LOL, Ms. Narcissist as a diagnostician, how silly. But since I a good liberal, I'll over you some self help, if you take it seriously there maybe help:

Narcissistic Personality Inventory - Psych Central

Now try very hard to be honest, if you can you may become enlightened, and laughed at less often.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I see you're holding PoliticalChicky to that standard. (That's sarcasm, in case you didn't notice.)

It's her premise (one where only certain kinds of Free Speech was what she meant when she said all and "no law"...), and we can't even get to the first base of her admitting or even discussing examples of how her OP fails.

Why the double standard?

Once PC and you even admit to the premise and first discussion that ensued - maybe we can tackle your comments.

I understand the desperation you of the extreme left have in seeking to distract from the fact that you are at war to end civil rights, but a red herring fallacy is an impotent approach to covering for the party.

James Madison addressed slander and libel at the time of the 1st. Freedom of speech ensures that THE STATE cannot prohibit speech. So this gives license to defamation? Hardly, Madison correctly observed that criminal statutes do not protect from tort. Simply put, defamation is a matter of civil, not criminal law. Congress is not prohibiting speech by passing laws that address defamation, simply adding redress for those harmed by speech.

Likewise the statement of Holms was NEVER that one cannot shout fire in a crowded theater, only that one can be held civilly and criminally responsible for the results of that act.

Your red herring is now filleted.

Now let us look at the war the fascist democrats wage on the 1st amendment and BoR in general.

Let's start with the Reid demand that the 1st simply be repealed;

{Hours earlier, Democrats announced that they would take the first steps early next month to try to change the First Amendment’s free speech protections, overturning Supreme Court precedent and giving Congress the right to limit who can spend money in elections and how much they are allowed to spend.

Read more: After Reid refuses amendments Senate Republicans kill tax cuts package - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter}

 

[Uncensored2008]

New poll: Republicans and Democrats both overwhelmingly support net neutrality

New poll Republicans and Democrats both overwhelmingly support net neutrality - The Washington Post

Do you ever tire of being wrong?

The power of ignorance at work.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Net Neutrality is all about free speech and access to free speech.

Even for you, that is an astoundingly stupid claim.

I get it, you have no fucking idea what net neutrality is, or what it does - but the hate sites told you to be for it - so you are.

People against it are in favor of corporate control of what will me available to users of the net, depending on which service provider is being used. It equates to straight forward fascism.

Are you actually drunk, or are you truly this ignorant?

 

[paperview]

I see you're holding PoliticalChicky to that standard. (That's sarcasm, in case you didn't notice.)

It's her premise (one where only certain kinds of Free Speech was what she meant when she said all and "no law"...), and we can't even get to the first base of her admitting or even discussing examples of how her OP fails.

Why the double standard?

Once PC and you even admit to the premise and first discussion that ensued - maybe we can tackle your comments.

I understand the desperation you of the extreme left have in seeking to distract from the fact that you are at war to end civil rights, but a red herring fallacy is an impotent approach to covering for the party.

James Madison addressed slander and libel at the time of the 1st. Freedom of speech ensures that THE STATE cannot prohibit speech. So this gives license to defamation? Hardly, Madison correctly observed that criminal statutes do not protect from tort. Simply put, defamation is a matter of civil, not criminal law. Congress is not prohibiting speech by passing laws that address defamation, simply adding redress for those harmed by speech.

Likewise the statement of Holms was NEVER that one cannot shout fire in a crowded theater, only that one can be held civilly and criminally responsible for the results of that act.

Your red herring is now filleted.

...

What the FUCK?

You didn't even *touch* what I said. Why don't you hold PolitcalChic accountable?

Moreover, you contradicted own yourself in that stupidass, nonsensical reply.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You mean when you lied about my bringing it up??

You don't mind your lies being revealed?
Gee....you must be a Liberal.

See? She won't discuss the facts of the matter.

It was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH.

How about you address that?

You're an unrepentant liar.....what's to discuss?

How predictable ^^^, unable to defend herself she goes on the attack.

It is the reason you appear in these threads....your hunger to be beaten and abused.
It speaks to your sense of self-realization.....you know what you deserve.

This is what your threads boil down to

But....you're a proven liar.....so......

 

[NYcarbineer]

New poll: Republicans and Democrats both overwhelmingly support net neutrality

New poll Republicans and Democrats both overwhelmingly support net neutrality - The Washington Post

Do you ever tire of being wrong?

The power of ignorance at work.

lol, you've turned on PoliticalChic.

 

[paperview]

See? She won't discuss the facts of the matter.

It was the republicans that wanted to enshrine into law a flag desecration ban -banning FREE SPEECH.

How about you address that?

You're an unrepentant liar.....what's to discuss?

How predictable ^^^, unable to defend herself she goes on the attack.

It is the reason you appear in these threads....your hunger to be beaten and abused.
It speaks to your sense of self-realization.....you know what you deserve.

This is what your threads boil down to

But....you're a proven liar.....so......

The only way I'm a liar is if flag desecration in *not* Free Speech.

Is it, or isn't it?