Trump highlights the difference between conservatives and libertarians.

[Batcat]

Of course I don’t vote for the Libertarian candidate for President as that would be a wasted vote.

That's the only part that matters.

If you live in a swing state then you have to vote Trump or Democratic. If you are a libertarian in Michigan and you voted Libertarian then you helped Biden win. And in 2016 you helped Hillary lose.

If you live in a RED or solid blue state then you're an idiot if you are a libertarian and voted for Trump. The more votes the libertarian or green party get, the more national $ and attention they get. So it matters depending on what state you live in.

Fact is there aren't a lot of libertarians out there and it's not catching on. But it's lasted longer than the Tea Party did I'll give them that. They have a following.

You make good sense to me. I live in a swing state.

Biden is gung-ho on draconian gun control. Obviously as a libertarian I am not. My vote went for Trump in 2020.

The Libertarian view on Guns​

Gun ownership is the civil liberty which modern liberalism likes to conveniently forget. The Republican Party is friendlier to gun rights, but not nearly enough. Many GOP supporters were unhappy when President Trump instructed the ATF to treat bump stocks as machine guns, or when he said he would “think about” banning suppressors.

Ron Paul summed up the libertarian view on guns like so: “Nobody should tell you you can’t own a gun because it might be misused.” And George Orwell, a socialist of all things, explained why: “That rifle on the wall of the labourer’s cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.”

One of the libertarian ideas people often struggle with is this: Any political party or form of government has the potential to turn tyrannical. More than 250 million people were killed by their governments during the 20th century alone. Guns preserve political freedom by equipping people to fight back against the only organization which is legally allowed to kill them. In a country where gun confiscation has quite literally concluded with democide, it is crucial to remember that guns aren’t simply fun toys for rednecks.

Libertarian: What Is It? A Brief Summary of Their Beliefs

What is a libertarian? It is someone who believes that personal liberty is precious and must be protected, and recognizes the government as its greatest threat.

blog.libertasbella.com

 

[sealybobo]

If you live in a swing state then you have to vote Trump or Democratic.

That's not true.

If you are a libertarian in Michigan and you voted Libertarian then you helped Biden win.

neither is that.

And in 2016 you helped Hillary lose.

Strike three.

Sorry - I don't play lesser-of-two-evils. It's a con.

A libertarian who votes Democrat or Republican is wasting their vote. Wasting their most important opportunity to support what they believe in.

Well us Democrats love it. Helps us win. Thanks I guess.

 

[sealybobo]

Of course I don’t vote for the Libertarian candidate for President as that would be a wasted vote.

That's the only part that matters.

If you live in a swing state then you have to vote Trump or Democratic. If you are a libertarian in Michigan and you voted Libertarian then you helped Biden win. And in 2016 you helped Hillary lose.

If you live in a RED or solid blue state then you're an idiot if you are a libertarian and voted for Trump. The more votes the libertarian or green party get, the more national $ and attention they get. So it matters depending on what state you live in.

Fact is there aren't a lot of libertarians out there and it's not catching on. But it's lasted longer than the Tea Party did I'll give them that. They have a following.

You make good sense to me. I live in a swing state.

Biden is gung-ho on draconian gun control. Obviously as a libertarian I am not. My vote went for Trump in 2020.

The Libertarian view on Guns​

Gun ownership is the civil liberty which modern liberalism likes to conveniently forget. The Republican Party is friendlier to gun rights, but not nearly enough. Many GOP supporters were unhappy when President Trump instructed the ATF to treat bump stocks as machine guns, or when he said he would “think about” banning suppressors.

Ron Paul summed up the libertarian view on guns like so: “Nobody should tell you you can’t own a gun because it might be misused.” And George Orwell, a socialist of all things, explained why: “That rifle on the wall of the labourer’s cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.”

One of the libertarian ideas people often struggle with is this: Any political party or form of government has the potential to turn tyrannical. More than 250 million people were killed by their governments during the 20th century alone. Guns preserve political freedom by equipping people to fight back against the only organization which is legally allowed to kill them. In a country where gun confiscation has quite literally concluded with democide, it is crucial to remember that guns aren’t simply fun toys for rednecks.

Libertarian: What Is It? A Brief Summary of Their Beliefs

What is a libertarian? It is someone who believes that personal liberty is precious and must be protected, and recognizes the government as its greatest threat.

blog.libertasbella.com

Yes. Libertarians believe if someone can manufacture a ray gun that can level half a city with one pull of the trigger, he should be able to sell it unregulated on the free market and if it becomes a problem then "the market will decide".

No thanks.

 

[dblack]

If you live in a swing state then you have to vote Trump or Democratic.

That's not true.

If you are a libertarian in Michigan and you voted Libertarian then you helped Biden win.

neither is that.

And in 2016 you helped Hillary lose.

Strike three.

Sorry - I don't play lesser-of-two-evils. It's a con.

A libertarian who votes Democrat or Republican is wasting their vote. Wasting their most important opportunity to support what they believe in.

Well us Democrats love it. Helps us win. Thanks I guess.

Not true. Four in a row.

But hey, delusion makes the world go 'round. You're right there with the Trumpsters.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Trumpster "conservatives" pretend to care about limited government and individual liberty, but they really don't. They like bullying others with government just as much as the liberals, they just have a different list of ways they'd like to bully people.

Don't fall for it.

Like what?

How do "conservatives" want to bully others with government? Examples.

I am not saying you are wrong, just not sure what issue you are focusing on.

Well, right out of the gate, there's the issue we've been butting heads on for weeks - the current Trump movement to impose their version of the fairness doctrine on big tech companies.

Well, I think we disagree on the characterization. It's not demanding "equal time" or exposure. The Tech companies are using individuals with whom the contract to attract advertisers, but then breach their own terms of service for political purposes. It's a different issue all together.

If big tech wants to shut down certain political views, fine, but the relationship between end user and big tech is contractual and big tech MUST be transparent about who/what they are going to shut down, or be sued.

There is NOTHING about my position on the relationship between big tech and the end user that is anti-liberty.

It's anti-accountability. Is that your definition of liberty?

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

So stow the liberals and conservative are ‘the same’ BS; it’s a lie – it's as ridiculous as it is wrong.

Agreed. They're not the same. Each wants to bully others in their own special way. But they're both wrong, and I won't support either.

Sure you do. You support the left's position on Big tech censorship right down the line.

Magaturds take no accountability for their actions. You seem to agree with that.

 

[whitehall]

What is it with lefties? Hillary's husband abused an intern barely older than his daughter, incinerated about 80 members of a quirky religious sect with tanks and poison gas and bombed a relatively defenseless country in Europe without consulting congress when he was caught with his pants down but lefties accuse Trump of bullying during a relatively peaceful and prosperous four years. Why do lefties speak in cliches and pretend to be losers when they won all the marbles?

 

[Batcat]

Of course I don’t vote for the Libertarian candidate for President as that would be a wasted vote.

That's the only part that matters.

If you live in a swing state then you have to vote Trump or Democratic. If you are a libertarian in Michigan and you voted Libertarian then you helped Biden win. And in 2016 you helped Hillary lose.

If you live in a RED or solid blue state then you're an idiot if you are a libertarian and voted for Trump. The more votes the libertarian or green party get, the more national $ and attention they get. So it matters depending on what state you live in.

Fact is there aren't a lot of libertarians out there and it's not catching on. But it's lasted longer than the Tea Party did I'll give them that. They have a following.

You make good sense to me. I live in a swing state.

Biden is gung-ho on draconian gun control. Obviously as a libertarian I am not. My vote went for Trump in 2020.

The Libertarian view on Guns​

Gun ownership is the civil liberty which modern liberalism likes to conveniently forget. The Republican Party is friendlier to gun rights, but not nearly enough. Many GOP supporters were unhappy when President Trump instructed the ATF to treat bump stocks as machine guns, or when he said he would “think about” banning suppressors.

Ron Paul summed up the libertarian view on guns like so: “Nobody should tell you you can’t own a gun because it might be misused.” And George Orwell, a socialist of all things, explained why: “That rifle on the wall of the labourer’s cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.”

One of the libertarian ideas people often struggle with is this: Any political party or form of government has the potential to turn tyrannical. More than 250 million people were killed by their governments during the 20th century alone. Guns preserve political freedom by equipping people to fight back against the only organization which is legally allowed to kill them. In a country where gun confiscation has quite literally concluded with democide, it is crucial to remember that guns aren’t simply fun toys for rednecks.

Libertarian: What Is It? A Brief Summary of Their Beliefs

What is a libertarian? It is someone who believes that personal liberty is precious and must be protected, and recognizes the government as its greatest threat.

blog.libertasbella.com

Yes. Libertarians believe if someone can manufacture a ray gun that can level half a city with one pull of the trigger, he should be able to sell it unregulated on the free market and if it becomes a problem then "the market will decide".

No thanks.

I like the concept of a ray gun especially one with a stun setting.

A ray gun that could destroy half a city with one pull of the trigger would be a bit of an overkill.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Trumpster "conservatives" pretend to care about limited government and individual liberty, but they really don't. They like bullying others with government just as much as the liberals, they just have a different list of ways they'd like to bully people.

Don't fall for it.

I am conservative and would love the Fed to only be about defense.

Kill your baby? Thats fine, it should be state by state rule.

What other government? I dont care if you do hula hoops during the flag. You look like an idiot, but it shouldnt be and is not against the law.

You are losing me on the big government thing

I get that you're no libertarian, but a lot of Trump supporters claim to be. And they're not fooling anyone.

There is a test on the internet I have taken a number of times over the years. The results say I am a libertarian every time. I am also a Trump Deplorable.

The only test that matters is what we do.

Did you vote for Joe Biden?

No.

You have principles.

Respect.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Of course I don’t vote for the Libertarian candidate for President as that would be a wasted vote.

That's the only part that matters.

If you live in a swing state then you have to vote Trump or Democratic. If you are a libertarian in Michigan and you voted Libertarian then you helped Biden win. And in 2016 you helped Hillary lose.

If you live in a RED or solid blue state then you're an idiot if you are a libertarian and voted for Trump. The more votes the libertarian or green party get, the more national $ and attention they get. So it matters depending on what state you live in.

Fact is there aren't a lot of libertarians out there and it's not catching on. But it's lasted longer than the Tea Party did I'll give them that. They have a following.

You make good sense to me. I live in a swing state.

Biden is gung-ho on draconian gun control. Obviously as a libertarian I am not. My vote went for Trump in 2020.

The Libertarian view on Guns​

Gun ownership is the civil liberty which modern liberalism likes to conveniently forget. The Republican Party is friendlier to gun rights, but not nearly enough. Many GOP supporters were unhappy when President Trump instructed the ATF to treat bump stocks as machine guns, or when he said he would “think about” banning suppressors.

Ron Paul summed up the libertarian view on guns like so: “Nobody should tell you you can’t own a gun because it might be misused.” And George Orwell, a socialist of all things, explained why: “That rifle on the wall of the labourer’s cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.”

One of the libertarian ideas people often struggle with is this: Any political party or form of government has the potential to turn tyrannical. More than 250 million people were killed by their governments during the 20th century alone. Guns preserve political freedom by equipping people to fight back against the only organization which is legally allowed to kill them. In a country where gun confiscation has quite literally concluded with democide, it is crucial to remember that guns aren’t simply fun toys for rednecks.

Libertarian: What Is It? A Brief Summary of Their Beliefs

What is a libertarian? It is someone who believes that personal liberty is precious and must be protected, and recognizes the government as its greatest threat.

blog.libertasbella.com

Yes. Libertarians believe if someone can manufacture a ray gun that can level half a city with one pull of the trigger, he should be able to sell it unregulated on the free market and if it becomes a problem then "the market will decide".

No thanks.

If someone can create such a device, please let us know.

Otherwise, quit making up bullshit scenarios where you imagine in your delusions that people generally want to destroy the world.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Trumpster "conservatives" pretend to care about limited government and individual liberty, but they really don't. They like bullying others with government just as much as the liberals, they just have a different list of ways they'd like to bully people.

Don't fall for it.

Like what?

How do "conservatives" want to bully others with government? Examples.

I am not saying you are wrong, just not sure what issue you are focusing on.

Well, right out of the gate, there's the issue we've been butting heads on for weeks - the current Trump movement to impose their version of the fairness doctrine on big tech companies.

Well, I think we disagree on the characterization. It's not demanding "equal time" or exposure. The Tech companies are using individuals with whom the contract to attract advertisers, but then breach their own terms of service for political purposes. It's a different issue all together.

If big tech wants to shut down certain political views, fine, but the relationship between end user and big tech is contractual and big tech MUST be transparent about who/what they are going to shut down, or be sued.

There is NOTHING about my position on the relationship between big tech and the end user that is anti-liberty.

It's anti-accountability. Is that your definition of liberty?

What the fuck do you mean "anti-accountability"?

What is the solution to "bad" speech? Censorship or more speech?

I don't imagine you understand the concept of liberty.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Trumpster "conservatives" pretend to care about limited government and individual liberty, but they really don't. They like bullying others with government just as much as the liberals, they just have a different list of ways they'd like to bully people.

Don't fall for it.

Like what?

How do "conservatives" want to bully others with government? Examples.

I am not saying you are wrong, just not sure what issue you are focusing on.

Well, right out of the gate, there's the issue we've been butting heads on for weeks - the current Trump movement to impose their version of the fairness doctrine on big tech companies.

Well, I think we disagree on the characterization. It's not demanding "equal time" or exposure. The Tech companies are using individuals with whom the contract to attract advertisers, but then breach their own terms of service for political purposes. It's a different issue all together.

If big tech wants to shut down certain political views, fine, but the relationship between end user and big tech is contractual and big tech MUST be transparent about who/what they are going to shut down, or be sued.

There is NOTHING about my position on the relationship between big tech and the end user that is anti-liberty.

It's anti-accountability. Is that your definition of liberty?

What the fuck do you mean "anti-accountability"?

What is the solution to "bad" speech? Censorship or more speech?

I don't imagine you understand the concept of liberty.

You want to bitch and moan about 'censorship' from privately owned social media platforms. That's when you want the government to step in to give you a mulligan for being whiney entitled pricks. That's fucking dumb.

Do you know what TOS is? Do you know you can be tossed out on your ass for violating them and it will be legally binding in favor of the platform provider? Maybe you're just obtuse.

So, when a user acts like a fucking entitled piece of shit, spreading disinformation on said platforms like Qult45 wastes of human tissue tend to do, do they ever take responsibility for their fucking entitled piece of shit actions?

No. The answer is no. Fuck 'em. I don't think they deserve liberty.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Trumpster "conservatives" pretend to care about limited government and individual liberty, but they really don't. They like bullying others with government just as much as the liberals, they just have a different list of ways they'd like to bully people.

Don't fall for it.

Like what?

How do "conservatives" want to bully others with government? Examples.

I am not saying you are wrong, just not sure what issue you are focusing on.

Well, right out of the gate, there's the issue we've been butting heads on for weeks - the current Trump movement to impose their version of the fairness doctrine on big tech companies.

Well, I think we disagree on the characterization. It's not demanding "equal time" or exposure. The Tech companies are using individuals with whom the contract to attract advertisers, but then breach their own terms of service for political purposes. It's a different issue all together.

If big tech wants to shut down certain political views, fine, but the relationship between end user and big tech is contractual and big tech MUST be transparent about who/what they are going to shut down, or be sued.

There is NOTHING about my position on the relationship between big tech and the end user that is anti-liberty.

It's anti-accountability. Is that your definition of liberty?

What the fuck do you mean "anti-accountability"?

What is the solution to "bad" speech? Censorship or more speech?

I don't imagine you understand the concept of liberty.

You want to bitch and moan about 'censorship' from privately owned social media platforms. That's when you want the government to step in to give you a mulligan for being whiney entitled pricks. That's fucking dumb.

Do you know what TOS is? Do you know you can be tossed out on your ass for violating them and it will be legally binding in favor of the platform provider? Maybe you're just obtuse.

So, when a user acts like a fucking entitled piece of shit, spreading disinformation on said platforms like Qult45 wastes of human tissue tend to do, do they ever take responsibility for their fucking entitled piece of shit actions?

No. The answer is no. Fuck 'em. I don't think they deserve liberty.

Maybe you don't understand the concept of a contractual relationship.

But your rant about your hatred of liberty is noted. And expected.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Trumpster "conservatives" pretend to care about limited government and individual liberty, but they really don't. They like bullying others with government just as much as the liberals, they just have a different list of ways they'd like to bully people.

Don't fall for it.

Like what?

How do "conservatives" want to bully others with government? Examples.

I am not saying you are wrong, just not sure what issue you are focusing on.

Well, right out of the gate, there's the issue we've been butting heads on for weeks - the current Trump movement to impose their version of the fairness doctrine on big tech companies.

Well, I think we disagree on the characterization. It's not demanding "equal time" or exposure. The Tech companies are using individuals with whom the contract to attract advertisers, but then breach their own terms of service for political purposes. It's a different issue all together.

If big tech wants to shut down certain political views, fine, but the relationship between end user and big tech is contractual and big tech MUST be transparent about who/what they are going to shut down, or be sued.

There is NOTHING about my position on the relationship between big tech and the end user that is anti-liberty.

It's anti-accountability. Is that your definition of liberty?

What the fuck do you mean "anti-accountability"?

What is the solution to "bad" speech? Censorship or more speech?

I don't imagine you understand the concept of liberty.

You want to bitch and moan about 'censorship' from privately owned social media platforms. That's when you want the government to step in to give you a mulligan for being whiney entitled pricks. That's fucking dumb.

Do you know what TOS is? Do you know you can be tossed out on your ass for violating them and it will be legally binding in favor of the platform provider? Maybe you're just obtuse.

So, when a user acts like a fucking entitled piece of shit, spreading disinformation on said platforms like Qult45 wastes of human tissue tend to do, do they ever take responsibility for their fucking entitled piece of shit actions?

No. The answer is no. Fuck 'em. I don't think they deserve liberty.

Maybe you don't understand the concept of a contractual relationship.

But your rant about your hatred of liberty is noted. And expected.

Once again sidestepping the accountability. Typical. Do you see value in all opinions? I sure as fuck don't.

 

[bripat9643]

So stow the liberals and conservative are ‘the same’ BS; it’s a lie – it's as ridiculous as it is wrong.

Agreed. They're not the same. Each wants to bully others in their own special way. But they're both wrong, and I won't support either.

Sure you do. You support the left's position on Big tech censorship right down the line.

Magaturds take no accountability for their actions. You seem to agree with that.

What does that idiotic accusation have to do with anything?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Trumpster "conservatives" pretend to care about limited government and individual liberty, but they really don't. They like bullying others with government just as much as the liberals, they just have a different list of ways they'd like to bully people.

Don't fall for it.

Like what?

How do "conservatives" want to bully others with government? Examples.

I am not saying you are wrong, just not sure what issue you are focusing on.

Well, right out of the gate, there's the issue we've been butting heads on for weeks - the current Trump movement to impose their version of the fairness doctrine on big tech companies.

Well, I think we disagree on the characterization. It's not demanding "equal time" or exposure. The Tech companies are using individuals with whom the contract to attract advertisers, but then breach their own terms of service for political purposes. It's a different issue all together.

If big tech wants to shut down certain political views, fine, but the relationship between end user and big tech is contractual and big tech MUST be transparent about who/what they are going to shut down, or be sued.

There is NOTHING about my position on the relationship between big tech and the end user that is anti-liberty.

It's anti-accountability. Is that your definition of liberty?

What the fuck do you mean "anti-accountability"?

What is the solution to "bad" speech? Censorship or more speech?

I don't imagine you understand the concept of liberty.

You want to bitch and moan about 'censorship' from privately owned social media platforms. That's when you want the government to step in to give you a mulligan for being whiney entitled pricks. That's fucking dumb.

Do you know what TOS is? Do you know you can be tossed out on your ass for violating them and it will be legally binding in favor of the platform provider? Maybe you're just obtuse.

So, when a user acts like a fucking entitled piece of shit, spreading disinformation on said platforms like Qult45 wastes of human tissue tend to do, do they ever take responsibility for their fucking entitled piece of shit actions?

No. The answer is no. Fuck 'em. I don't think they deserve liberty.

Maybe you don't understand the concept of a contractual relationship.

But your rant about your hatred of liberty is noted. And expected.

Once again sidestepping the accountability. Typical. Do you see value in all opinions? I sure as fuck don't.

Who should be accountable? Who gets to decide "accountability"?

I DO see the value in all opinion, even shitty ones, because that's the only way we will know of them and reject them.

Do you see the tyrant nature of your own self?

 

[bripat9643]

Trumpster "conservatives" pretend to care about limited government and individual liberty, but they really don't. They like bullying others with government just as much as the liberals, they just have a different list of ways they'd like to bully people.

Don't fall for it.

Like what?

How do "conservatives" want to bully others with government? Examples.

I am not saying you are wrong, just not sure what issue you are focusing on.

Well, right out of the gate, there's the issue we've been butting heads on for weeks - the current Trump movement to impose their version of the fairness doctrine on big tech companies.

Well, I think we disagree on the characterization. It's not demanding "equal time" or exposure. The Tech companies are using individuals with whom the contract to attract advertisers, but then breach their own terms of service for political purposes. It's a different issue all together.

If big tech wants to shut down certain political views, fine, but the relationship between end user and big tech is contractual and big tech MUST be transparent about who/what they are going to shut down, or be sued.

There is NOTHING about my position on the relationship between big tech and the end user that is anti-liberty.

It's anti-accountability. Is that your definition of liberty?

You support "accountability" to Mark Zuckerberg, and no one else.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

So stow the liberals and conservative are ‘the same’ BS; it’s a lie – it's as ridiculous as it is wrong.

Agreed. They're not the same. Each wants to bully others in their own special way. But they're both wrong, and I won't support either.

Sure you do. You support the left's position on Big tech censorship right down the line.

Magaturds take no accountability for their actions. You seem to agree with that.

What does that idiotic accusation have to do with anything?

It illustrates the intent of you shit birds. It illustrates that your content is untrustworthy, which means it has no redeemable value because you refuse to be called to the mat for it.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Trumpster "conservatives" pretend to care about limited government and individual liberty, but they really don't. They like bullying others with government just as much as the liberals, they just have a different list of ways they'd like to bully people.

Don't fall for it.

Like what?

How do "conservatives" want to bully others with government? Examples.

I am not saying you are wrong, just not sure what issue you are focusing on.

Well, right out of the gate, there's the issue we've been butting heads on for weeks - the current Trump movement to impose their version of the fairness doctrine on big tech companies.

Well, I think we disagree on the characterization. It's not demanding "equal time" or exposure. The Tech companies are using individuals with whom the contract to attract advertisers, but then breach their own terms of service for political purposes. It's a different issue all together.

If big tech wants to shut down certain political views, fine, but the relationship between end user and big tech is contractual and big tech MUST be transparent about who/what they are going to shut down, or be sued.

There is NOTHING about my position on the relationship between big tech and the end user that is anti-liberty.

It's anti-accountability. Is that your definition of liberty?

What the fuck do you mean "anti-accountability"?

What is the solution to "bad" speech? Censorship or more speech?

I don't imagine you understand the concept of liberty.

You want to bitch and moan about 'censorship' from privately owned social media platforms. That's when you want the government to step in to give you a mulligan for being whiney entitled pricks. That's fucking dumb.

Do you know what TOS is? Do you know you can be tossed out on your ass for violating them and it will be legally binding in favor of the platform provider? Maybe you're just obtuse.

So, when a user acts like a fucking entitled piece of shit, spreading disinformation on said platforms like Qult45 wastes of human tissue tend to do, do they ever take responsibility for their fucking entitled piece of shit actions?

No. The answer is no. Fuck 'em. I don't think they deserve liberty.

Maybe you don't understand the concept of a contractual relationship.

But your rant about your hatred of liberty is noted. And expected.

Once again sidestepping the accountability. Typical. Do you see value in all opinions? I sure as fuck don't.

Who should be accountable? Who gets to decide "accountability"?

I DO see the value in all opinion, even shitty ones, because that's the only way we will know of them and reject them.

Do you see the tyrant nature of your own self?

I call out bullshit when I see it. I'm certainly not here to sing kumbaya with the enemy.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Trumpster "conservatives" pretend to care about limited government and individual liberty, but they really don't. They like bullying others with government just as much as the liberals, they just have a different list of ways they'd like to bully people.

Don't fall for it.

Like what?

How do "conservatives" want to bully others with government? Examples.

I am not saying you are wrong, just not sure what issue you are focusing on.

Well, right out of the gate, there's the issue we've been butting heads on for weeks - the current Trump movement to impose their version of the fairness doctrine on big tech companies.

Well, I think we disagree on the characterization. It's not demanding "equal time" or exposure. The Tech companies are using individuals with whom the contract to attract advertisers, but then breach their own terms of service for political purposes. It's a different issue all together.

If big tech wants to shut down certain political views, fine, but the relationship between end user and big tech is contractual and big tech MUST be transparent about who/what they are going to shut down, or be sued.

There is NOTHING about my position on the relationship between big tech and the end user that is anti-liberty.

It's anti-accountability. Is that your definition of liberty?

You support "accountability" to Mark Zuckerberg, and no one else.

Troll comment. Means nothing.