1754
Comments (65)
sorted by:
36
deleted 36 points ago +37 / -1
19
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 19 points ago +20 / -1

Leftist / Democrats / Marxist hate America n want to destroy it.

12
highenergywinning 12 points ago +14 / -2

Only when they dont have power. Didnt see any of this happening from big tech from '09-'16

6
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 6 points ago +7 / -1

We didn’t have a Trump!!!

7
highenergywinning 7 points ago +7 / -0

Correct

6
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 6 points ago +6 / -0

🐸🇺🇸🐸

6
awooo 6 points ago +7 / -1

Nah, they've been doing it for a long time. Apple banned confederate flags on iTunes stuff in 2015 for example.

Freedom of speech, for those who own the presses

11
deleted 11 points ago +13 / -2
5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
4
ImFinallyNotAnAlt 4 points ago +4 / -0

There never was a “high” road. Republicans have been pushing that crap because they’re in the same crowd as the democrats. They’re like tag team wrestling, they go into the locker rooms and high five. The problem is we’re so complacent because we are oh so comfortable. That and we kicked God out of our lives. We stopped submitting to his authority and look what happens.

7
Ghostof_PatrickHenry 7 points ago +7 / -0

Agreed.

If we started hanging corrupt politicians, the others would fall into line real quick.

3
PhilipeNegro 3 points ago +3 / -0

^ This guy gets it

1
671-EVIL 1 point ago +1 / -0

1A doesn't say a company can't restrict your freedom of speech. That's why the assholes keep getting away with it.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
17
Mexicola1976 17 points ago +18 / -1

Anytime there is an attractive woman in the thumbnail, 99.99% chance they are Republican/conservative. It never fails.

7
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 7 points ago +8 / -1

Yes. It’s true.

5
deleted 5 points ago +6 / -1
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
14
Averon 14 points ago +14 / -0

I want all of the governors, mayors and judges who issued unconstitutional orders arrested and jailed for life.

8
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 8 points ago +8 / -0

Yes. Impeached , sued personally, stripped of their assets and then imprisioned

10
Averon 10 points ago +10 / -0

After destroying the lives of thousands upon thousands of Americans, I think they should share the experience.

I can honestly say that if I was in one of their positions, removing people's constitutional rights would not even cross my mind. Give suggestions, yes, make sure supplies get to where they are needed, yes, put everyone under house arrest for committing no crimes at all? Absolutely not!

What is wrong with these people? Phased reopening? They shouldn't have had the authority to close businesses to start with.

Clearly, even the ones opening first still think they have authority over which businesses can and can't be open. What's to stop them from just closing things down or removing rights again? These people are dangerous.

They should immediately apologize, tell everyone they took authority they clearly did not have and resign.

3
ImFinallyNotAnAlt 3 points ago +3 / -0

They’ll never apologize. Not unless the people gain their balls back. There’s no apology due to a serf. It’s our fault for complying.

0
CQVFEFE 0 points ago +1 / -1

Life?

I prefer the idea of reserving life imprisonment (along with execution) for the most heinous and unspeakable and life-threatening of crimes.

3
Averon 3 points ago +3 / -0

Isn't denying the rights of citizens and destroying the economy which people depend on to live among the most heinous and unspeakable and life threatening of crimes? People will and are dying from this shutdown. Just because the news media doesn't report it doesn't mean it isn't happening.

So yes, I believe the governors, mayors and judges who participated in this shutdown should receive life sentences in prison. But I'm not in any kind of power or authority to make such things happen, so the best I can do is voice my opinion, which is the right of every American.

1
CQVFEFE 1 point ago +1 / -0

Isn't denying the rights of citizens and destroying the economy which people depend on to live among the most heinous and unspeakable and life threatening of crimes?

Conceptually, though it remains to be seen if it destroys the economy; Trump gets his chance to fix it again. I was reserving life imprisonment for violent acts of cruelty and butchery, but then I'm also OK with scum like Bernie Madoff getting it, so I guess it isn't black and white

1
Averon 1 point ago +1 / -0

Even if Trump fixes everything, it doesn't mean they didn't involve themselves in actions that would result in a destroyed economy if Trump wasn't there too clean up their mess. And people have still been deprived of their freedom unjustly, which is inexcusable.

10
EmperorCovfefe 10 points ago +12 / -2

Big Tech does have the right to censor anything on what they control because they are private companies. But the second they censor with a political bias they are "Publishers" and not "Platforms" and can be sued for libel for anything a user posts. Anything.

8
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 8 points ago +9 / -1

I’m still waiting for that distinction to be rendered by a judge n jury. That will be the best thing that happened to the internet ever

5
EmperorCovfefe 5 points ago +5 / -0

Yeah, if the law won't be enforced than just repeal it.

1
justwinning 1 point ago +3 / -2

That will be the best thing that happened to the internet ever

Then this site becomes a "publisher" too. It's a legal mess and will cause so much censorship from the fear of being sued, really bad idea.

1
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 1 point ago +2 / -1

This site is an exchange of ideas. Right now it’s still legal. Oh yea and that pesky constitution keeps it that way. Life comes with risk.

1
justwinning 1 point ago +2 / -1

I'm saying if this "publisher" stuff gets applied to places like Twitter and Youtube it would also get applied to this site and then that opens the door for lawsuits and all kinds of censorship. Who would want to run a platform like this when you can be held responsible for random peoples comments and posts?

1
Demonspawn 1 point ago +1 / -0

Who would want to run a platform like this when you can be held responsible for random peoples comments and posts?

If you're a platform, you won't be held responsble.

The issue is that being a platform rather than a publisher puts significant limits on what you can remove.

I'd be more clear on what you can and can't remove, but the current lack of caselaw (which will be shook out after the first ruling that turns a "platform" into a publisher) doesn't provide me with much guidelines.

0
justwinning 0 points ago +1 / -1

Yeah I used the wrong semantics in that sentence. Of course what I was saying was who would want to run a site like this when you can be held responsible for random peoples comments and posts? Seems if Youtube gets ruled a publisher then sites like this are next.

I'd be more clear on what you can and can't remove

I have a feeling that would work in the left's favor or change nothing at all, might even increase unwanted censorship a hundred fold on sites that are not 100% free speech sites. I think it's a very dangerous push.

Youtube, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Twitter, Facebook have essentially become public forums and public utilities and should be legally regarded as such. That solves the issue, all that publisher stuff just seems to create a bigger mess.

1
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Do I need a lawyer ? 😬😬😬 yes I understand. This will go to Supreme Court within 10 years.

6
justwinning 6 points ago +7 / -1

Big Tech does have the right to censor anything on what they control because they are private companies.

I disagree. They have become essential public forums and public utilities in some cases and should be legally regarded as such. ISPs, Telecoms, Twitter, Google/Apple App Store etc.

3
EmperorCovfefe 3 points ago +3 / -0

Good luck finding a Republican to support taking action on any of our ideas. All they want to say is "let the market solve the problem".

3
justwinning 3 points ago +4 / -1

Yeah been hearing that for years. Republicans are very slow on tech issues which is why we're in this situation in the first place. They seem to have no clue how powerful big tech is and that they essentially have control over modern public speech. Facebook, Google, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft aren't going anywhere anytime soon.

1
EmperorCovfefe 1 point ago +1 / -0

Its not about being slow on tech issues. It's about laizzez faire economics and ayn rand being the intellectual foundation of the contemporary republican party. Paul Ryan was the biggest ayn rand fan in congress, he even once had to give a speech denying he liked ayn rand more than jesus. And then Paul Ryan blocks the wall as speaker of the house. There is a connection. The Koch Brothers are also big laizzez faire idiots.

0
justwinning 0 points ago +1 / -1

It's both really. So many boomer Republicans that run the party have no clue what's going on in the tech world. I think even a lot of the laisses faire Repubs would capitulate if they had an understanding of big tech and the censorship issues that will only get worse on the current path.

2
Demonspawn 2 points ago +2 / -0

I was pretty laisses faire until Gab. That proved to me that the only way to have a "free" market would be to set up a separate market from the ground up... perhaps all the way down to currency/government.

0
justwinning 0 points ago +1 / -1

I was pretty laisses faire until Gab.

I was too when I was young, but as I read a lot about the dangers of poorly regulated or unregulated monopolies, duopolies, oligopolies, oligarchies, concentrated power, concentrated wealth, centralization etc etc. I became a very big proponent of regulation that protects peoples rights and their pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness.

a "free" market would be to set up a separate market from the ground up... perhaps all the way down to currency/government.

even then without proper regulation captured markets and monopolies can and often will form which then allows for abusive control over people, price fixing, price gouging, collusion, insider trading etc etc

3
awooo 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yeah, when was the last time you had a phone call disconnected for hate speech. Using Big Tech's logic, that should be allowed. Muh private phone company.

2
kag-2020- 2 points ago +2 / -0

Exactly. They claim they are "platforms" so they are no different than telephone services. Your phone provider can't cut you off for saying you love the President and neither can these other "platforms." The problem is they want to be publishers but don't want the liability that comes with it so they just fill the government with people that look the other way.

2
CQVFEFE 2 points ago +3 / -1

Big Tech does have the right to censor anything on what they control because they are private companies. But the second they censor with a political bias they are "Publishers" and not "Platforms" and can be sued for libel for anything a user posts.

Second sentence is fighting with the first. And winning.

I'm a staunch libertarian (small L). And I reject the entire notion of "they're private companies so they can do as they goddamn well please." Not when the entire nation (to say nothing of the world) relies on them for communication, like the phone companies.

The argument that "they're private companies so they can do as they goddamn well please" is like the "private cell phone companies" eavesdropping on all your calls and then canceling your service because they don't like what you and your friends and family are talking about on "THEIR" platform. There was a TV ad saying the exact same thing, and it's 100% accurate.

"B-b-but the social media posting doesn't come with the expectation of privacy! You know you're posting in public!"

My answer to this is "So? They still should be held accountable to the principle of free speech being a natural right, just as the phone companies would be."

7
MAH3A2HO 7 points ago +7 / -0

I'm tired of hearing how this is an unprecedented event. Smallpox and a whole host of other nasties were around when they WROTE the Constitution. Those diseases killed a lot more than 0.1%.

4
inquimouse 4 points ago +4 / -0

I wish the whole "hate speech" construction would disappear. It's thought policing all the way and should never have been accepted for a minute.

1
CQVFEFE 1 point ago +2 / -1

Correct. The only antidote for "hate speech" is more love speech.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
2
inquimouse 2 points ago +2 / -0

How do you determine if a slur is " racial" in the first place when some people make everything about race? Why are slurs by some people racial or hateful but the exact same verbalization by someone else isn"t? When do common phrases that were around in general speech for hundreds of years suddenly become hate if still used in the same situations? No, it is all indefensible. Hate is an interior state and hate speech is clearly "white people said something about blacks." The hate is inferred by words and it's all one way.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
inquimouse 2 points ago +2 / -0

OK. In my opinion allowing "hate speech" to be a thing is a much more worrisome loss of liberty than people wearing masks or staying home: at the moment it is truly rumor, fear, and the madness of crowds because of all the hype and people are looking for something to cling to. °Hate speech" is pure control with no excuse except virtue signalling.

4
LonelyLadypedeSF_CA 4 points ago +5 / -1

Satan Clause is coming to town.

3
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

😳😳😳

3
Flptplt 3 points ago +3 / -0

This girl is awesome, check out the rest of her Twitter feed. It is legit

2
CQVFEFE 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah, OAN rocks, Fox sux

Amazing now that Fox is owned by one of the Big Six, that they're still allowed to do any Trump-positive material at all

2
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

It is

2
MAGA_Master 2 points ago +2 / -0

The only hate I’m worried about is the North’s hate for the South.

1
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

😳😳😳

2
DrDT 2 points ago +2 / -0

...and we seem to be letting them get away with it...

2
LibertyOverSecurity 2 points ago +2 / -0

😍

1
wcbask 1 point ago +1 / -0

I haven't seen Emerald as WH correspondent on OAN recently. A lot of Chanel Rion. Did Em leave?

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
1
CQVFEFE 1 point ago +1 / -0

Loves me some Emerald Robinson and OAN

1
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

I wish I got that on my cable !!!