Vance does it again

[Ropey]

And it won't matter who wins.

It all leads to the same place.

Are you sure that you're not letting Natty C use your account?

 

[Coyote]

This is the ONLY argument that you have, she entered a public forum, knowing how ill suited she was to answer questions in the public, and now you want to censor fair use content in the public sphere.

The government is not on your side, the ACLU is not on your side.

Maybe the CCP or United Russia is on your side, but you are making a very authoritarian argument.


We can agree, that for a public politician from one of the two major parties, it was a dumb thing to do. OTH? It was a joke and the left is just as bad, as I have proved.

No need to go on a censorship crusade b/c he made the presidential nominee of the DNC look like a fool.



. . . but as I wrote earlier, folks on the right troll and make fun of their opponents. Folks on the left censor theirs.

I have no sympathy or support for either.

They are both leading us to a dystopian nightmare.

She was a kid!

 

[MisterBeale]

We can agree, that for a public politician from one of the two major parties, it was a dumb thing to do.

 

[Coyote]

I'm glad you admit, that she should have been able to handle this, because we all learn to deal with it in Jr. High.

Now you are making crap up.

Most kids do not have the emotional or developmental maturity at that age to deal with it. It is not a matter of learning, it is a matter of biology and brain development.

That is how dumb this entire thread is.

Bitching about people being mean.

Is anything “too low”?

 

[MisterBeale]

She was a kid!

So was Nicolas Sandman, but neither he, nor his parents signed any release form.

. . . as I had already pointed out. . .

I would take this seriously, if it hadn't been for the fact that the establishment has been bullying Trump and all his followers since 2015.

Q.E.D.


So save it. The establishment don't care, not sure why I or anyone else should.

 

[Coyote]

So was Nicolas Sandman, but neither he, nor his parents signed any release form.

. . . as I had already pointed out. . .

As I already pointed out, my argument is the same regarding Sandmann. Why do bring it up again?

Q.E.D.


So save it. The establishment don't care, not sure why I or anyone else should.

So stuff it. Why are you commenting? Trump is an adult, a public figure, and a bully himself.

 

[MisterBeale]

Now you are making crap up.

Nope, just the facts.

I never had my folks fight my battles in school, nor did I fight my own kids. Most parents don't. You know that.

Bullying is a fact of life.

IN fact, I did an in depth study of bullying, and it primarily originates from abuse at home, and the political motivations and actions of FORCED GOVERNMENT SCHOOLING.

If you don't like this? Then perhaps you should support more family and community involvement in faiths that reinforce core principles. Government censorship is never the solution.

Most kids do not have the emotional or developmental maturity at that age to deal with it.

Specious argument. You have no proof of this.

 

[MisterBeale]

Is anything “too low”?

Yup, censoring people. Using the legal system to attack others. Specious reasons for impeachment.

Why are you commenting? Trump is an adult, a public figure, and a bully himself.

Just pointing out, that both sides do it, and the establishment doesn't really give a shit for this young teen. YOU MAY, I MAY, and others of good conscious may, but the point is, the folks that started it were the government and corporate media.

I don't care much for Trump, but I do know, he never attacks unless attacked first.

 

[MisterBeale]

Why do bring it up again?

Because it didn't matter then, as proved by the courts, and it sure as hell does not matter when a teen enters a public pageant, signing away her content rights to that pageant, and now?

Because Vance makes an apt comparison, and the establishment has made up "controversy," and it is being used as a very, VERY week tactic to attack him, rather than focus on the issues.


It is unAmerican to want to control the thoughts and ideas of others.

That clip was fair use and in the public domain. We all know this. . .

So why you would want to be taking the side of censorship? It's beyond me. And if that isn't what motivates you in this thread? I don't know what the hell does.

Do you don't think folks can't handle a bit of bullying?

I have news for you, this dumb teen is no longer a teen, so the whole thing is a NON-ISSUE.

 

[Coyote]

As I already pointed out, my argument is the same regarding Sandmann. Why do bring it up again?



So stuff it. Why are you commenting?

Nope, just the facts.

I never had my folks fight my battles in school, nor did I fight my own kids. Most parents don't. You know that.

Bullying is a fact of life.

You are relating your own experiences. Mine were similar. However, the world that kids have to navigate today is very different than what we had.

I didn’t have social media. Things didn’t go viral. There was a limit to the damage bullies could do. Or there parents.

I don’t think that should be trivialized with a “when I was a kid we walked 300 miles in the blowing snow, uphill, to get school” attitude. Social media has changed everything from parent using their kids to kids posting dumb stuff that (unlike when we were kids) never ever goes away. No guardrails. Now even have deep fakes, where teen girls are posted naked via sophisticated “photo-shopping” techniques. That kind of bullying.

You can’t say it it was like that for us.

 

[Ropey]

Is anything “too low”?

Low? You used your moderator positions to create political environments conducive to your leftist views, while leftist cry bullies are always playing the victim.

And you used to run out those who disagreed with you.

Remember? Now that's low.

A Federal Voter ID law will deal with the left's many games.

 

[MisterBeale]

world that kids have to navigate today is very different than what we had.

It isn't the job of government to raise kids.

I see a time, where the billionaire oligarchs who back both parties, want to roll out a a digital ID. I see it at all the elites' global confabs. They want to do this so folks cannot have pen names to speak and write freely against government and corporate corruption.

Digital identity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

If they do this? Then it will be the right that want to restrict access to the internet based on age, not the left.

The left are the ones that want to strip parental rights and raise the kids.

A Federal Voter ID law will deal with the left's many games.

And it won't matter who wins.

It all leads to the same place.

Q.E.D.

 

[MisterBeale]

Now even have deep fakes, where teen girls are posted naked via sophisticated “photo-shopping” techniques. That kind of bullying.

So when the global establishment finally gets its way on an international digital ID, you will be in favor of banning minors from the internet, YES?

 

[Cellblock2429]

Vance is an Epstein clone.

/—-/ Here’s a crazy idea, Libs. Forget the gotcha stuff that isn’t working and run Kamala on her rock solid recess VP.
What do you think?

 

[Coyote]

Because it didn't matter then, as proved by the courts, and it sure as hell does not matter when a teen enters a public pageant, signing away her content rights to that pageant, and now?

Because Vance makes an apt comparison, and the establishment has made up "controversy," and it is being used as a very, VERY week tactic to attack him, rather than focus on the issues.


It is unAmerican to want to control the thoughts and ideas of others.

It isn’t about controlling the thoughts and ideas of others. Where did you derive that from?

You talked about the Cardinal Virtues. What Vance chose to do certainly seems to fly in the face of those. Why defend it? Yes. He can do. No. It is not illegal. So defending his use of it and supporting his defense of that use while saying people shouldn’t be criticizing it.

Are you defending because he is a rightist and the left is criticizing it? Unlike Sandmann? Two very similar things from an ethical perspective but you don’t seem to treat them that way.

That clip was fair use and in the public domain. We all know this. . .

So why you would want to be taking the side of censorship? It's beyond me. And if that isn't what motivates you in this thread? I don't know what the hell does.

How is condemning it censorship? How is calling Vance to task for it “censorship”? It isn’t. It is the same free speech that you are willing to support when Vance does it.

Where is the censorship? Did the government order it taken down or blocked? Or are we not allowed to condemn it?

Do you don't think folks can't handle a bit of bullying?

I have news for you, this dumb teen is no longer a teen, so the whole thing is a NON-ISSUE.

That doesn’t change that it was badly done. Hell, you sure seem to have a double standard when it comes to teens…it isn’t ok to do it to Sandmann but it’s ok to do it to this “dumb” woman. Sandmann was 16, she was 17. Not much of a difference.

 

[Coyote]

So when the global establishment finally gets its way on an international digital ID, you will be in favor of banning minors from the internet, YES?

No. The internet has a lot of value, but things have exploded exponentially and our ability to manage the change has not.

Should minors access to child porn sites?
What level of control should parents have and would you be willing to allow them the tools to create limits?
Should parents be allowed to use their children for profit on social media?

No guardrails right?

 

[surada]

The dumb blonde made fucking national news on how stupid she sounded. Everybody made fun the of the bitch. She was HORRIBLE. She was a pretty face and ABSOLUTELY NO FUCKING BRAINS. She didn't stutter, she didn't SAY anything.

A blonde version of Kumalot. Works for me.



If you support Kumalot, you're not a U.S. American and you need to get a fucking map.

She's 17, you ignorant pig.

 

[Blaster]

She's 17.

She's hot looking but too young to bang.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Yes it does, that is the very definition of it. She competed in a public forum/competition that she knew was being filmed.

Signing a release form. Appearing on television. Appearing in a publicity fueled pageant, al make one a public figure. Any one of them would. All of them definitely make her a public figure. If she is that sensitive, she should never have appeared in the pageant. When she's done over reacting, she can get on with her life.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

She was a kid!

Are you saying she was mishandled by her parents? Because that's where all blame should go. And, she's 34 years old now. 34! Get over yourself lady.

What this is, and the only thing it is, is another excuse for communist democrats to clutch their pearls and head for the fainting couch.