The Leftist War and Suppression of Free Thought and Free Speech - YouTube bans Don Shipley's channel

2»

Replies

  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,816 Senior Member
    In other words, you're all for censorship as long as it isn't censorship of the Liberal/Democrat Socialist/Communist screed, and only directed at things you don't like or agree with. That's mighty white of ya, as we used to say back in the '60s and '70s! :D
    As to SCOTUS finding it in the Constitution, they can probably find it in the same place that they found the income tax, prohibition, Social Security, and abortion to be legal 'according to the Constitution'.
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • zorbazorba Senior Member Posts: 19,118 Senior Member
    edited March 12 #33
    I'm afraid I have to agree with our token Liberal on the issue of corporate personhood - what a fine mess that has created. We didn't have all this crap "virtue signalling" (on both sides) before then, the Hobby Lobby fiasco, etc, etc.
    -Zorba, "The Veiled Male"

    "If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,590 Senior Member
    Mike, I assume you are on Elizabeth Warren's side on this one right?

    https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/11/facebook-removes-elizabeth-warren-ads-1216757
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,816 Senior Member
    Mike, I assume you are on Elizabeth Warren's side on this one right?

    https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/11/facebook-removes-elizabeth-warren-ads-1216757
    Well, you know what happens when you 'assume' stuff. I wouldn't wipe my butt with her suede tanned hide. She's a card carrying Communist trying to pass herself off as a Democratic Socialist.

    And Facebook and other social media, by editing content, meet the criteria for a publisher, and should have to follow the same rules already in place for publishers. How come you can't answer the question, and deflect to some stupid crap like that link? Can't take the heat?
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,590 Senior Member
    edited March 13 #36
    tennmike said:

    These companies have a de facto monopoly - at that point, the "private company" argument no longer flies.

    I'm normally against anti-discrimination laws, but if you're the one and only grocery shop in town, you shouldn't have the right to refuse service to people because of their political views, race, gender or religion. If you have a monopoly, you should have an obligation not to discriminate.

    Likewise, if Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, etc. are number one at their respective things, they should be treated like public utilities rather than private companies. In fact, given how much federal funding Silicion Valley got…

    Also, Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, etc. are PLATFORMS, not publishers - they are not responsible for what gets shared on their platforms.
    If you can pick and choose between whose stuff you want to see, you are a publisher - and are therefore liable for the stuff you publish.
    They cannot have it both ways. At least, they should not be allowed to have it both ways.

    Funny Mike you sure sound a lot like that "card carrying Communist trying to pass herself off as a Democratic Socialist" in your own post just the other day. It seems like maybe you might be trying to "have it both ways." 
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,553 Senior Member
    Mike, I assume you are on Elizabeth Warren's side on this one right?

    https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/11/facebook-removes-elizabeth-warren-ads-1216757
    Zuckerburg has been buying out the competition and using the same algorithms to run them for years. He can 'flip the switches' in any way he wants to, to make them different from Facebook, and flip them back, any time, while claiming it will take months of investigation to find 'the glitch.'

    In this way, he can exert control over free speech for many years to come, as each entity waits  to be challenged in court. Zuckerburg has squirreled away more money than ten billionaires can afford to lose in lawsuits, so a few multi-million dollar lawsuits are just an amusement for him.

    Elizabeth Warren knows this very well, so why does she limit her social media targets to Facebook? It's all political rhetoric without any teeth, anyway. She won't seriously challenge any entity that funnels campaign money to leftist politicians.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,816 Senior Member
    Funny Mike you sure sound a lot like that "card carrying Communist trying to pass herself off as a Democratic Socialist" in your own post just the other day. It seems like maybe you might be trying to "have it both ways." 
    Well, from your Liberal Socialist POV I can see how you'd think that, truth being fluid and whatever you want it to be today, which is different from yesterday, and will be something else tomorrow. As long as they do that which is agreeable to the Left, then you're all for it. But I can bet dollars to doughnuts you'd be screaming until you coughed up a lung if the Left was being suppressed in the social media and MSM platforms.
    Your constant trolling and instigating has been getting old for a long time. You sound more and more like Saul Alinsky.
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,553 Senior Member
    edited March 15 #39
    I don't know, tennmike. I think that every political forum needs a burnt-out Alinski-ite troll, along with a couple of converts, to stimulate controversy. You know - the yin and the yang type of thing.

    We all find 'gaps in our armor,' every time we engage each other, and we can use the same Internet research tools that they use, to recover. Old farts need to engage with the same silliness that their offspring have to deal with, every day, if they are to remain useful to them. Besides, it is a real challenge to engage with a clever lefty, and not be reduced to using their methods to win an argument or evade an inconvenient truth.

  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,816 Senior Member
    bisley said:
    I don't know, tennmike. I think that every political forum needs a burnt-out Alinski-ite troll, along with a couple of converts, to stimulate controversy. You know - the yin and the yang type of thing.

    We all find 'gaps in our armor,' every time we engage each other, and we can use the same Internet research tools that they use, to recover. Old farts need to engage with the same silliness that their offspring have to deal with, every day, if they are to remain useful to them. Besides, it is a real challenge to engage with a clever lefty, and not be reduced to using their methods to win an argument or evade an inconvenient truth.

    Probably true, although comparing a conversation  with a KKK or white supremacist person, I find the conversation more stimulating than talking with a lying, instigating, deflecting, trolling liberal of any stripe. And considering where I live, over the years I've conversed with my share of KKK and white supremacist folk, so my comparison is valid, from my point of view.

    O.K. Back to the subject. From what I've gleaned from this thread there is ONE person, and one alone, who does not believe in free speech. And that person also believes that suppression of free speech and the dissemination thereof is a valid tool to further the aims of a political party. And that any platform that does so in the cause of the Left is entitled to do so and should be praised for that effort.
    Communism, fascism, and democratic socialism are all political systems that actively suppress free speech. History is crammed full of such examples. The absolute best ongoing example in the U.S. is the Food and Drug Administration. For anyone interested, Google --FDA suppression of free speech--. OUR government does it on a daily basis.
    Here's one example:

    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,590 Senior Member
    So Mike at what point are you willing to take the free speech argument? You now say private companies do not have the right to set their own standards and prohibit speech that conflicts with those standards because doing so would violate the 2nd amendment since you say it applies not just to the government, but also to companies correct? That's certainly what I'm hearing. 

    If that is correct then you would defend me from being banned from this site for calling you every name in the book and then photo shopping your head on the top of some gay porn and posting it here. Free speech and all! How about going to a church and loudly playing death metal music during services. I know I'm going to extremes here, but the point is we limit free speech all the time in our society and groups and organizations often set standards of conduct for members that include limits on speech that must be followed if you want to be a part of it. Many past members here have failed to follow those standards and are no longer welcome here. 
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • GilaGila Posts: 993 Senior Member
    bisley said:
    I don't know, tennmike. I think that every political forum needs a burnt-out Alinski-ite troll, along with a couple of converts, to stimulate controversy. You know - the yin and the yang type of thing.

    We all find 'gaps in our armor,' every time we engage each other, and we can use the same Internet research tools that they use, to recover. Old farts need to engage with the same silliness that their offspring have to deal with, every day, if they are to remain useful to them. Besides, it is a real challenge to engage with a clever lefty, and not be reduced to using their methods to win an argument or evade an inconvenient truth.

    The important thing to understand here is that the left will never allow facts to get in their way.
    No good deed goes unpunished...
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,816 Senior Member
    So Mike at what point are you willing to take the free speech argument? You now say private companies do not have the right to set their own standards and prohibit speech that conflicts with those standards because doing so would violate the 2nd amendment since you say it applies not just to the government, but also to companies correct? That's certainly what I'm hearing. 

    If that is correct then you would defend me from being banned from this site for calling you every name in the book and then photo shopping your head on the top of some gay porn and posting it here. Free speech and all! How about going to a church and loudly playing death metal music during services. I know I'm going to extremes here, but the point is we limit free speech all the time in our society and groups and organizations often set standards of conduct for members that include limits on speech that must be followed if you want to be a part of it. Many past members here have failed to follow those standards and are no longer welcome here. 
    I went to high school with my shotgun in the car during dove season, and when I wanted to bust a few clays at the skeet range. Can't do that now, though. Freedom lost. It was also common for folk to have a gun rack in the back window of their pickup trucks in the employee parking lot so they could go deer hunting when they got off work. Can't do that now, either. Freedom lost. The guns didn't change, but the people who couldn't control their hatred sure screwed stuff up.Used to be able to buy firearms without filling out any Fed paperwork. Freedom lost. So much for the 2nd Amendment deflection.

    The other things mentioned in the 2nd paragraph are easy to explain. If one has the morals and upbringing of a feral alleycat, then they would do those things...............or try to. Try that church thing in my neck of the woods and it would not end well for the ones trying to play that music in church. There would likely be either a hasty retreat on the part of the folk playing that music, or a covey of ambulances called to pick up the remains.Folk around here are armed and can be extremely dangerous if provoked. And passing out knuckle sammiches is/would  also an option. As to the other regarding calling me whatever or doing the Photoshop thing, I'd say knock yourself out because.......................wait for it......................I don't care! :D  I'm far beyond the point of being offended by that kind of thing. It's all mind over matter; if you choose not to mind, then it don't matter.
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • sgtrock21sgtrock21 Senior Member Posts: 1,569 Senior Member
    tennmike said:
    bisley said:
    I don't know, tennmike. I think that every political forum needs a burnt-out Alinski-ite troll, along with a couple of converts, to stimulate controversy. You know - the yin and the yang type of thing.

    We all find 'gaps in our armor,' every time we engage each other, and we can use the same Internet research tools that they use, to recover. Old farts need to engage with the same silliness that their offspring have to deal with, every day, if they are to remain useful to them. Besides, it is a real challenge to engage with a clever lefty, and not be reduced to using their methods to win an argument or evade an inconvenient truth.

    Probably true, although comparing a conversation  with a KKK or white supremacist person, I find the conversation more stimulating than talking with a lying, instigating, deflecting, trolling liberal of any stripe. And considering where I live, over the years I've conversed with my share of KKK and white supremacist folk, so my comparison is valid, from my point of view.

    O.K. Back to the subject. From what I've gleaned from this thread there is ONE person, and one alone, who does not believe in free speech. And that person also believes that suppression of free speech and the dissemination thereof is a valid tool to further the aims of a political party. And that any platform that does so in the cause of the Left is entitled to do so and should be praised for that effort.
    Communism, fascism, and democratic socialism are all political systems that actively suppress free speech. History is crammed full of such examples. The absolute best ongoing example in the U.S. is the Food and Drug Administration. For anyone interested, Google --FDA suppression of free speech--. OUR government does it on a daily basis.
    Here's one example:

    Yes. Communism, Fascism, and Democratic Socialism totally suppress free speech after the citizens have been disarmed. I have studied history since I began reading at age 4. I believe there is so little difference between them it does not matter. Communists and Fascists eliminate their opposition and those who are non productive by execution and starvation. Democratic Socialists enslave the non productive with free stuff and tax the productive to death. 
  • sgtrock21sgtrock21 Senior Member Posts: 1,569 Senior Member
    tennmike said:
    So Mike at what point are you willing to take the free speech argument? You now say private companies do not have the right to set their own standards and prohibit speech that conflicts with those standards because doing so would violate the 2nd amendment since you say it applies not just to the government, but also to companies correct? That's certainly what I'm hearing. 

    If that is correct then you would defend me from being banned from this site for calling you every name in the book and then photo shopping your head on the top of some gay porn and posting it here. Free speech and all! How about going to a church and loudly playing death metal music during services. I know I'm going to extremes here, but the point is we limit free speech all the time in our society and groups and organizations often set standards of conduct for members that include limits on speech that must be followed if you want to be a part of it. Many past members here have failed to follow those standards and are no longer welcome here. 
    I went to high school with my shotgun in the car during dove season, and when I wanted to bust a few clays at the skeet range. Can't do that now, though. Freedom lost. It was also common for folk to have a gun rack in the back window of their pickup trucks in the employee parking lot so they could go deer hunting when they got off work. Can't do that now, either. Freedom lost. The guns didn't change, but the people who couldn't control their hatred sure screwed stuff up.Used to be able to buy firearms without filling out any Fed paperwork. Freedom lost. So much for the 2nd Amendment deflection.

    The other things mentioned in the 2nd paragraph are easy to explain. If one has the morals and upbringing of a feral alleycat, then they would do those things...............or try to. Try that church thing in my neck of the woods and it would not end well for the ones trying to play that music in church. There would likely be either a hasty retreat on the part of the folk playing that music, or a covey of ambulances called to pick up the remains.Folk around here are armed and can be extremely dangerous if provoked. And passing out knuckle sammiches is/would  also an option. As to the other regarding calling me whatever or doing the Photoshop thing, I'd say knock yourself out because.......................wait for it......................I don't care! :D  I'm far beyond the point of being offended by that kind of thing. It's all mind over matter; if you choose not to mind, then it don't matter.
    I grew up in a fairly small semi rural town where there was no need to lock vehicles and homes. If it was not yours you left it alone. The exception was an unexpected rain shower and a vehicle with a window down. You would of course roll it up which is now no longer possible with power windows. At the beginning of my high school junior year (1968) a shotgun or rifle was stolen from a student's un-locked vehicle. The Principle's solution was that all guns including handguns brought to school had to be checked at the office to ensure they were unloaded and secured in our wall lockers. Ammunition had remain in the vehicle. 
  • Billy_BuddBilly_Budd Posts: 575 Senior Member


    If that is correct then you would defend me from being banned from this site for calling you every name in the book and then photo shopping your head on the top of some gay porn and posting it here. Free speech and all! How about going to a church and loudly playing death metal music during services. 


    And you wonder why nobody takes you seriously. Lol!
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,268 Senior Member
    Obnoxious conduct in real America is usually dealt with swiftly and effectively, and "nobody saw nuthin'- - - -if the perpetrator happens to complain to the cops about his knuckle bumps and road rash.  It's sort of like the sneak thief I knew who fell down the stairs- - - -repeatedly- - - - -in a one-story USAF barracks.
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,553 Senior Member
    edited March 16 #48
    There will always be people who will argue against everything, just because they possess the necessary cleverness to gum up the works of anything that is working properly, but is still not at a level of 'perfect' efficiency.

    There is almost nothing that cannot be taken apart, with the intent to degrade any single, weak component of the larger machinery. Someone who is entirely wrong, and doesn't even believe his own rhetoric, can use this method to peel off the layers of lukewarm support that always surround the greater issue, while another clever person works on a different layer, and still another devises a way to unite the 'lukewarmers' into a different common cause. It is nothing more than the age old strategy of divide and conquer, as a way for a minorities to win battles over majorities. It was devised to win military battles, but has been adapted to the political battlefield, for use during radical times.

    My contention is that nothing but objectivity can win out against such cleverness, and remaining objective is the real battle, in politics. I believe this because I have struggled with it, myself, for decades. Objectivity is almost dead, in politics, and you can't achieve it any other way except by analyzing as much of the data as you can handle, most of which is either manufactured or corrupted. The thing that helps the most in this endeavor is to screen out information supplied by the 'serial offenders.'
2»
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.